~Final Essay~

~Ashlee Lawrence~Honors History 10~06/12/08~

Abstract:
In this paper I will show you what was needed in a leader to guide the 13 colonies through the American Revolution and how collaboration made it possible. I will use Founding Brothers by Joseph J. Ellis, YouTube.com, and Wikipedia to support my facts.

The American Revolution required an abundant amount of leadership. All of this leadership was shared among a group of men who worked together to create what we know today as the United States of America, independent from Britain. These men, including George Washington, John Adams Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison all had different specialties and talents that they shared to collaborate and lead the American Revolution.

There are many different traits a leader can have. Depending on what you are leading some traits are more important than others. When leading a revolution you need a leader that can stay calm and is cool headed, someone who has experience in the military. Other important traits would be persuasion and boldness to stand up for what you believe. Sometimes it is also necessary to be elegant and stealthy. All of these characteristics are great in themselves, but when you put them together you get something magnificent.

George Washington was a very big man, tall broad shoulders, and it gave him an heir that people respected. He was very calm and collected and was able to think things through in a stressful situation. This "coolness" is what made him a great military leader. He was respected by all and was courageous. He was looked upon as a role model. One example of his true character was his retirement. As Washington grew older he knew that his time had come to hand over the reins of the United States. "The firm tone of his mind, for which he had been remarkable, was beginning to relax; a listlessness of labor, a desire for tranquility had crept on him, and a willingness to let others act, or even think for him"(1) It was the way he went about the whole situation that was remarkable. He had all the power in his hands, "He holds levees like a King, receives congratulations on his birthday like a King, employs his old enemies like a King...."(2), and yet he gave it up because he realized that he was incapable of doing the best that someone else could do at that point in his life. It takes a man to be a King, it takes a leader to give it up.

To be able to lead a population you have to have their support. John Adams specialty was public speaking and persuasion. His favorite form of conversation was an argument.(3) Adams could be heard at the Continental Congress meetings expressing his opinion about the colonies being independent from Britain. "My judgment approves this measure and my whole heart is in it. All that I have, all that i am, and all that I hope in this life I am now ready to stake up on it. While I live let me have a country....a free country!"(4) This is part of the speech that was heard at the continental congress as Adams was trying to convince the colonies to unite. He was successful and the Declaration of Independence was written. "The resolution to draft independent constitutions was, as Adams put it, 'independence itself'."(5)

One of the most important qualities of being a leader is to be able to collaborate with others. Leading a revolution or war is not a task that can be done alone. Adams and Jefferson came together through the revolution and made a very unique pair. Adams was short and stout and a very improvisational, mile-a-minute talker who knew how to convince people of what he wanted. Adams and Jefferson were like the sun and the moon; completely different. Jefferson was tall, dark and hansom with a very elegant style and he believed that argument was "a violation of the natural harmonies he heard inside his head".(6)

Adams and Jefferson had worked side by side in the continental congress, having different views of how freedom from Britain should be accumulated. Their next collaboration was in drafting the Declaration of Independence. In 1784 Jefferson was considered family to the Adams and the true friendship began. Adams and Jefferson had different political views but were very close to each other at heart. This makes the collaboration stronger.

Adams and Jefferson were not the only people who collaborated throughout the revolution to make it a success. Early on before the revolution Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison had a sit down to discuss their problems. Jefferson was trying to help smooth things out between Hamilton and Madison. As they collaborated they came up with an agreement; Madison would not vote for Hamilton's plan but he would hold his tongue and let it have its fate. In return Hamilton used his influence to make sure that the Potomac River was the permanent residence of the national capital.

A leader can be described as having many different traits or qualities and those qualities can be superb, but when they are put together with other leaders who have different qualities you get a leader that can accomplish anything. Like the old saying, "Two heads are better than one", two leaders are better than one, or in this case, multiple leaders are better than one. Without the collaboration of Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Adams, and Washington the United States would not have made it through the revolution. Combining each of their talents into a "super leader" made the colonies unstoppable.

Sources
(1) Founding Brothers, pg. 125

(2) Founding Brothers, pg. 127

(3) Found Brothers, pg. 163

(4) John Adams - God Save The American States (youtube) 3:30

(5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams#Continental_Congress

(6) Founding Brothers, pg. 163

~My Dear Brohers...I Am Proposing WAR!~

~Ashlee Lawrence~Honors History 10~05/13/08~

My dear brothers, I speak to you today to propose a new idea. Something I am sure many of you will oppose. I can only hope that after presenting to you the following information you will agree with me and support me.

Britain is our mother country. She has been great to us through the years. Keeping us under her wing and protecting us in times of need. Together we have defeated the French! This victory that seems so great is not a blessing brought forth but rather a calamity in disguise.

Ever since we left Britian and settled in New England they have been trying to get us to come back and in doing so have been making it hard for us here in America. This all began with the Navigation Acts in 1660. With these acts Britain declared that only British ships would carry things to and fro of Britain. Any other trading with outside parties would have to go through England of Whales first, be unloaded, checked, and reloaded before it could make a sucessful trip. This caused the price for trading to go up, therefore dangling a small carrot in front of our eyes to get us to go back to the mother land.

The next hit from Britain was the Sugar and Molasses Act of 1773. They knew that molasses was a commonly used ingredient in making rum. The West Indies Islands were much cheaper in selling molasses than Britain itself was. Instead of banning import from the West Indies so that we would have to buy from Britain they decided to put taxes on the molasses that we imported. At this point they had stuck us in a pickle; either buy from Britain or pay taxes.

Once again trying to get out of debt by taxing us they came up with the Stamp Act in 1765. Any document we made had to have a taxed stamp on it. This was a plain black and white infringement on our rights as englishmen, and to top it all off, "None of the revenue from the Stamp Act was targeted at reducing the national debt." All of the money from the stamp act went into the defence that they sent over here for us to defend our new established lands. Every other minute they were creating "acts" to get more money from us.

I leave the "acts" behind us and bring up the Boston Massacre. Our mother country has been so gracious as to provide us with defences....at our own cost. The soldiers do a marvolous job at defending and standing guard...until they are teased by a little boy; at which point they loose their cool and knock the boy out with a musket. A crowd gathers and as the evening passes it grows. The soldier retreats back and calls in reinforcements. One of the reinforcements has fallen down to the ground from a club hit. The crowd is taunting, "Fire, fire". As the fallen soldier gets to his feet in anger he demands, "Fire". As I am sure you all recall and understand, I would like to recap the happenings that day. The defences that our mother country provided for us fired into a crowd of our own, killing 5 colonists.

But you know, they did not stop there. The Intolerable Acts passed in 1774 were many a result of the Boston Tea Party. Many of these acts directly infringing on the rights of us englishmen and only benefitting the British. I bring all of these horrible events to your attention so as to propose a new idea, Independance from Britain. Now, I know from reading

The Massachusetts Spy on July 7, 1774, that some of you characterized independence as “a tree of forbidden and accursed fruit, which if any colony on this continent should be so mad as to attempt teaching, the rest would have virtue and wisdom enough to draw their swords and hew the traitors into submission, if not into loyalty.” But I say, something must be done.

In the beggining, some of these acts were tollerable. But will they ever stop? The anwer is quite clear; as long as we stay attached to Britain she is going to use us as we are not at her convenience on her own land. I think we all agree that we need independance from Britain!

But wait you say, why should all of the colonies take action for something that is only dealing with Massachusettes? I shall answer with a question back to you; are we not the thirteen colonies of America? Should we not stick together and defend each other? If we do sit back and wait won't Britain attack the rest of us? I think it is clear that trying to be nice and rolling with the punches of what Britain throws at us will get us no where. Take for example the Stamp Act. We rebelled in a small manner, and look at what happened, the act was repealed. The cure to our problem is ACTION! Our rights and freedom are on the line now. The very things that these colonies were founded on are on the line! We need to act and it needs to be now before Britain has to much control over us.

My dear brothers......I am proposing WAR!

Sources used that are not linked at some point in my essay.

http://www.americanrevolution.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEBGrCb-rVU

~Can A Civilization Develop/Advance Living In Cyclical Time?~

~Ashlee Lawrence~Honors History 10~04/16/08~

Abstract:

This paper will prove that a civilization can advance and develop living in cyclical time. I will use various internet sources as well as The Wealth and Poverty of Nations by

David S. Landes.

A civilization can advance and develop living in cyclical time. The Native Americans lived in cyclical time and developed their own way of living and advancements. Along with Native Americans the Ancient Greeks and the Egyptians also lived in cyclical time and had no problem advancing and developing a civilization.

Cyclical time is compared to looking at the pattern of life as a circle. Linear time is looking at the pattern of life as an on going progression. In linear time you look ahead to the future, you predict and plan for the future. Cyclical time is very much the opposite. Spring comes, (birth) then summer is here, (thriving point of life) then fall and winter bring the death; with the pattern repeating, starting with the rebirth in spring. There is no prediction of the future, it is all living in the moment and what is necessary to stay alive now.

The American Indians lived in cyclical time. They did not think about their need for more food in the future because of population growth, nor did they see the need to advance their civilization because it was working fine for them at the time. Their civilization although it hay not have been as advanced as those around it was plenty advanced for what they needed to do to survive. They could properly feed and clothe themselves, they had houses to live in, and they had established their own kind of government.

The Native Americans were not the only culture living in cyclical time that were advanced in some way. The ancient greeks were guided by the changing of the seasons and the migration of animal herds and without their advancements many things could not have been achieved in other civilizations and today. Heronas originated the automatic doors that we see everywhere today. He is also responsible for the first steam engine which was run off of methods that we still use today.

Egypt being as advanced, maybe even more advanced than the ancient greeks ran on cyclical time. The birth of classical greece from the dark ages is laid on egypt's shoulders. All fo the advancements they had made they passed along to the Greeks which helped them come out of their 500 year re-developmetn. Egypt had many of the world's firsts. The first library, the first physician, they created geometry, astronomy and were among the first to explore the human beings existence. Along with these advancements they also built the sphinx and were the only culture to raise pyramids.

As you can see from the Native Americans, the Ancient Greeks and the Egyptians a civilization can advance and develop living in cyclical time. There is no need to see the future [and how the advancements of today can help people of tomorrow] to advance today.

~Change Over Time~

~Ashlee Lawrence~Honors History 10~04/16/08~

Between the time of the founding of Jamestown and the American Revolution the natives were in a continuous cultural revolution because of their contact with the Europeans. Religion was one major revolution to the natives brought on by the Europeans, whereas health was another. Throughout this cultural revolution the way the natives are looked at through English eyes has not changed.

The natives were a very spiritual people. Everything that they did in life was for a purpose. They had certain ways to deal with the animals and crops as to satisfy the gods and to help them prosper. When the Europeans came, the natives way of living changed dramatically. The Europeans were Christians and had the idea in their head that they were going to convert all of the natives to Christianity. They saw the natives as nothing more than savages and were hoping that by converting them to Christianity they would civilize them. The natives did not like being told that the way they had been living their lives was wrong. Many generations had been living this way and they could see nothing wrong with it. Still the Europeans converted! They created praying towns which were towns that were made of all Christian Indians and where English customs and trades were taught in addition to religious instruction. What the natives didn't realize was that by learning Christianity, they were learning the english language, which would slowly made them less like themselves and more like the Europeans. By 1650 most Indians were in praying towns and in 1680 there were over 700 praying Indians.

Another way the natives were impacted by the Europeans was their health. When the Europeans came over they brought with them epidemics and diseases that the natives had never seen before. The Europeans had a lifestyle of living in close quarters with domesticated animals usually used for farming. When the natives were hit with smallpox, typhus, measles and many others they had no immunity built up to them and therefore came upon them one of the largest population decreases ever recorded in history; some say up to 95% of the native population died. Along with the diseases that the Europeans brought they also needed food which had to be provided by the natives. Where the Europeans were used to using domesticated animals for their food they had no idea how to hunt in the wild, therefore the providing of food depended completely on the natives. This put more stress on the natives as well as decreasing their amount of food.

Through all of these changes that the natives went through there was one thing that never changed, the way the Europeans looked at or saw the natives. The natives never changed in the eyes of the Europeans. They were always inferior to them and were seen as not really useful. The only thing that the Europeans could see that they needed the natives for was food, but the Europeans figured out how to hunt soon after they came over.

Dear Reader,

I am writting today on the fourteenth of April in the year two thousand and eight. I am recalling myself to life to tell you about the plan of union for Albany. In July of 1754 there was a war on the horizon. The French were crawling into American country and interrupting the lifestyles of the Indians. I believe it was well known that the Indian colonies could not survive on their own; hence my plan of union. My intent with this union was to bring all of the colonies together to make them stronger and capable to defeat the enemy. I am not affraid to say that i failed; the Crown disapproved my plan. I put alot of time and effort into my plan and was not the most joyful person at the Crown's decision. My best wishes to any plan that you may come up with!

B. Franklin

Albany Plan of Union

Ben Franklin

Ashlee Lawrence

April 15, 2008

Honors History 10

Being Ben Franklin and all I would like to take this time to share with you my marvelous, yet not so successful Plan of Union for Albany. In July of 1754 a war was on the horizon. The French were crawling into American country and interrupting the lifestyles of the Indians. I believe it was well known that the Indian colonies could not survive on their own; therefore there was a need for a “plan of union”.

Commissioners from each colony gathered together at Albany to come up with a plan. They knew it would be hard; most of the colonies could see nothing good from the others. They were commonly feeling that they wouldn’t want to help defend a colony that in return might not help defend them. Why would they want to disrupt their time of peace with the enemy to help someone else and potentially put themselves in danger? It seemed impossible to get each colony to agree to act as one in defense against the French. Therefore it was necessary for parliament to take action if the union was going to stay together. And so the journey began of unity.

One original thought was to create two or three distinct unions. After drafting this proposal even the ones who suggested it declined it. It was a bad idea for many reasons. First, you were still lacking the strength of combining all of the colonies. Yes it was better than having single colonies out to defend themselves, but it wasn’t enough for preservation. Second, some of the colonies were naturally stronger than others. If they were paired with only one or two other colonies there wouldn’t be equality and that would weaken the union. Overall, having all of the commissioners together would give them a better understanding of everyone in the colonies, therefore allowing them to provide for each other in a better manner.

Each having governments that were run differently, the only common ground they could find was their representatives. After the act had passed the house of representatives that was in office at the time would pick the representatives for the united colonies. The number of representatives from each colony would be determined by the population, with the parameters of having no less than two but no more than seven to represent each colony. Elections would last three years and as the population would fluctuate the number of representatives would be taken from the population paying taxes at the end of the third year of the election. The number of representatives would have been as follows: Massachusetts’s Bay and Virginia having 7; New Hampshire and Rhode Island having 2; Connecticut having 5; New York, Maryland and North and South Carolina all having 4; Pennsylvania having 6; and New Jersey having 3.

Seems how the colonies were spread out, Philadelphia was selected as the nearest to the center of all. The roads surrounding it were well built and forty to fifty miles could be and were travelled on them a day. Much of the traveling could be done by water in the summer time. For the unfortunate ones like New Hampshire and South Carolina the journey on horseback could set them back a good 15 to 20 days. This brought up another issue.

Soldiers may from time to time be needed in emergency to defend a specific geographical destination of the union. If you have some soldiers that can’t make it to your destination for a good 15 days how are they going to be of any help in the emergency situation? An excessive amount of money is going to be spent on getting them there and the event will most likely be taken care of by the time they do get there. This problem was thought to be solved by offering bounty money and having soldiers raised right where they would be needed, ready to be discharged when their services were of no longer of use.

In the terms of money and traveling each representative would be paid some wages. (Not too much, so that unsuitable persons should be tempted to join for the sake of gain, but enough so that people of greater knowledge would be willing to put in their time.) These members would have to travel to an annual meeting where sufficient business would be discussed to improve the efficiency of the union. The president general was left at liberty to place the meeting when and where he saw fit. In time of war the preferred meeting place may be where the most action is taking place. He also had the authority to call emergency meetings which in some cases could cause frequent long journeys that were unnecessary therefore the consent of at least seven colonies was needed to proceed with a meeting of this sort.

After many revisions and days of deliberation the Crown did not approve my plan of union. Although there were many advantages of uniting these eleven colonies, the Crown did not see a need for it. In previous times these colonies had defended themselves without the help of neighboring provinces or the mother country and turned out just fine. However, a change was made and a new plan was approved. In this new plan the governors from all of the colonies along with one or two of its respected members would be present at a meeting to discuss the defense of the whole as well as the erection of forts where needed along with troops, all the while having the power to draw money from the treasury to be reimbursed by a tax laid on the colonies by parliament.

Sometimes the best solution for a group of peoples is just out of reach for what you have to work with. My draft for Albany’s Plan of Union was just the case. With the right people it would have been a success, but in order to unite you have to have peace, and it was a long shot to peace with these eleven colonies!

Artwork

Eden

http;//www.thejnp.com/JNP/Artea_files/eden.jpg