Chapter 4: Other Europeans in Colonal America

As much as I like history, I honestly don't know much about European history and certain ethnicities are from geographically. It's interesting to read about it! The population statistics of the 18th century are a bit incomprehensible for me just because most areas/states were dominated by English people.

Germans
The British effort to assist the German Rhinelanders was a galant effort, but obviously not everyone saw it that way. It makes sense that the London poor of that time protested because even though they were poor, they were still British citizens. I can understand how it would feel for your coutry to basically tell you that you're not worthy of aid and that you're the lowest of the low. The government probably should have thought that through. Also, I like how the author included the part about the origins of the word refugee since it didn't exist until about 70 or so years after this conflict.
I find the ideology of indentured servitude somewhat demeaning as a person, espeically since the owners couldn't or wouldn't gurantee a better life after his/her term of service and/or most of the work was too arduous to live through. I like how the author states the historical process of my view:

For one thing, the system of indentured servitude, with its feudal overtones, was simply no longer consonant with the ideology of American life, although we must note that it lasted, on an ever-diminishing scale, until at least 1830, more than fifty years after the Declaration of Independence. (74)

I like how he demonstrates how indentured servitude didn't last but I don't like how many commas are in this sentence. Maybe there is a way to be more concise without giving too much information all at once. I find myself rereading much of the book for this reason. I understand the necessity for detail but sometimes it seems it's not written in a way that is efficient. It's that or I need to work on my reading comprehension.

Scotch Irish
Is the story of the Seaflower a significant one in American history? I'm unsure since I've just heard it for the first time reading this book. According to our book, out of 106 passengers, 46 starved to death and the other 60 survived by eating their bodies. So many stories in history document cannibalism since it's such taboo. In this case, it was taboo but also a necessity to remain living. Cannibalism is a noteable subject as long as there is historcial or cultural significance. News within the last 6 months about cannibalism (or zombies) in America don't show me much significance; it just kind of makes me fear my safety not only with people on drugs (whether I know they're on drugs or not) and safety with people in general.

Scots
Sometimes when I read this book, I feel a bit dumb since the author uses so many terms I'm not familiar with. This rarely happens with me which makes this so surprising! I've had to reread so much to understand at least conceptually where the author is going with the amount of detail he provides. I don't know if I'm not well versed in European history or if he's just that detailed. I don't know if I'm supposed to know all this detailed information already or if I'm supposed to be in the process of learning it. For example, I wasn't sure what "Teutonic" meant so I continued to read on to see if he gives some sort of explanation. He does give one, but I'm unsure of what highlands or lowlands have to do with the explanation of where "Teutonic" comes from. Whenever I read now, I refer between the book and my dictionary application to make sure I understand what I'm reading.

Irish
It seems that the Irish have been persecuted as a group throughout American history. Is it because of them as an ethnicity or because of the majority's religious affiliations? Regardless, the Irish had support for the patriotic cause of the Revolutionary War. Although the history of the United States can be seemingly prejudiced, it's nice to see different groups of ethnicities from different parts of the world pull together during moments of instability.

Welsh
So would the Welsh be a sub-ethnicity of Britain? Or a British ethnicity? I want to full understand concepts like this so I have a full understanding of what I'm reading. Anyway, the Welsh language in America is another language added to the list of languages/cultures either forgotten or mixed into the Melting Pot that is America. I know they author viewed America as a mosaic, but some elements of cultures are just melted into American culutre instead of a different piece of a mosiac.

Dutch
I honor the proper use of the term, "epic" since in today's culture, the meaning of epic is diminished by using it to describe something that is unique to a person's life instead of defining something that is truly epic.

The nation of the Dutch - the Netherlands - was forged in the epic struggle between the Protestant Hollanders and the Catholic Hapsburg Empire in the late sixteenth century and the first half of the seventeenth... (88)

Whenever I hear of American presidents, I never think of their ethnicity and just label them as American. Martin Van Buren and the Roosevelts obviously have an ethnic background (Dutch) but these names are synonymous with "American".

French
When there are cultures (like the Cajuns) that accept other cultures (like non-Cajuns)without much opposition, I appreciate it. I'm not saying traditions or culture should be depleted in any way; it's just nice people can recognize when cultures are evolving. It's what the United States is built on! Each ethinicity should have different cultures and people of other ethnicities should accepot and cherish it. On the flip side, it makes me somewhat sad when I learn of people trying to define who Americans are like the use of Cajun French in schools during the WWI era.
It took me many attempts to understand who the Huguenots were. Through reading the beginning of their part, I understood they were French but why are they a separate group? The Huguenots were a Calvinistic communion of France/French protestants but it started to make me wonder how religious groups become ethnic groups. I suppose the use of "Huguenots" is like how Pilgrims and Puritans were and how Jews are now. I agree that the Huguenots had traditions and cultures, but there has to be a more accurate term than "ethnicity". Perhaps I take the use of ethnicity too narrow-mindedly.

Spanish
I like how within the first sentence of the Spanish part, the author states the Spanish established the first successful European colony. English settlements are often thought of as the most important settlements in early American history (I had this idea also). We often forget how much Spanish influence there is in early America, although it is becoming more evident today wit the Mexican population in America. I was told in my intercultural class during the summer that the percentage of Mexican people in the U.S. is equal (more or less) to the black population. Even if many of these people are from Mexico rather than Spanish settlements in the U.S. itself, the Spanish influence throughout North and South America has remained strong since the beginning of Spanish colonies.

Swedes
Sweden of the 17th century is a prime example of the phrase, "Strike while the iron is hot". It seems they had the power to establish long term influence in America, but it just didn't happen that way. Again, some European residue has become synonymous with American culture, just like the log cabin.

Jews
Another group defined by their relgious background that is seen as an ethnicity. Again, I agree that Jews have their own traditions and culture in their religion, but where they come from geologically has a significance of who these people are as a group, even if they're orthodox.