“This controversy reminds us that race is a highly malleable category which historically has been deployed to reinforce existing social hierarchies and create new ones.”

I found this quote to be quite interesting because it applies not only to the book, but in history as we know it. We live in a modern multi-cultural society allowing us to engage in issues race and racism. England during the seventeenth century did not have a system set up quite like ours. It was a homogenous culture with beliefs that were developed under common law, customs, and practices over the years. For a man of a different race, let’s say a Moor to enter the scene, showcased them as being different not necessarily because of racist ideologies but because they did not belong in English society.

Loomba references the Genome Research study that would look into the oppressed castes in India during the 2001 United Nations Conference Against Racism should discuss the caste as a race. However, opponents believed that caste was not race because of there was a distinction between social issues and biology of those specific castes. To each culture they see race as different meaning. As we look through some of Shakespeare’s works, it’s important to understand that Shakespeare was not racist in nature nor should his writing be racist. We should look at his writing as a piece of history cemented during the Elizabethan era.

If we look at Othello, Shakespeare describes him as a Moor with a poor temper, characteristics that are attributed to Moors at the time. Although this might seem racist, it’s Shakespeare’s way of characterizing Othello in a way that audiences understand during the time. Race is definitely a tricky topic to discuss, especially throughout history. However, it is a very interesting to see how it the term develops throughout time.

This Thursday, Mackenzee and I will be doing a discussion on women and witchcraft. In efforts to prepare for our discussion, I thought that there is no better way to dive into the topic without watching a little Monty Python. Granted, this is not a realistic reenactment of the how the trials would have gone, nor is it portraying the right time period. However, it is a amazing way to step back and laugh at a topic that really isn’t a laughing matter. Irony.

Anyways, I hope that you enjoy this post as it is just a great way to introduce the a long and tumultuous history of women and witchcraft. Can’t wait to share and discuss our findings from The Bewitching of Anne Gunter. 

Probably one of the most complicated books I’ve ever read, Under the Molehill: An Elizabethan Spy Story is interesting way of deciphering whether or not France was trying to side with Protestant England or Catholic Europe. Throughout the book we as the audience are constantly questioning who the mole and even the main character. Even in the review about the book, the commenter did not guess the mole correctly or explain it well. I can honestly say that there is not much that I really understood from the beginning to the end of the book.

It can be said that this book should be read by a select few, probably historians that know the espionage operation from the inside out. But this is not a book that can be read easily during your free time. I do have to admit that this book was a valiant effort to really delve deep into an issue that has been untouched by many historians. Now, I understand why historians don’t come near this topic, probably because it inflicts pain thinking of the concepts.

I would have to say that Bossy, a genius in his own right, laminates his ideas but they are not crafted well. Kind of like having multiple sketches, but no masterpiece. Maybe I can return to this book after my college career when I have gained more knowledge on the topic, but for now this one will be resting on my shelf collecting dust. I do think that the cover is very nice. Optimism is key.

I really enjoyed reading and looking at this book. It was surprisingly easy to read and interesting to see first hand accounts of what the early English settlers thought of the New World and the natives that lived there for so many years. Obviously, the settlers really indulge their audience with their descriptions of the natives, citing them as savages with “brutus ignorance” and people “clothed in loose mantles made of deere skin.” From these descriptions, these savages seemed very primitive and almost incoherent to a functioning life.

I sometimes wonder what it would be like to be a Native American when all of a sudden a massive ship full of weird looking people draped in extravagant cloth were to take your land or community that your ancestors had toiled endlessly to create. I bet that would be like an alien race landing on our planet and saying, “hey this is ours, time for you to move on.” But the English felt justified in their actions.

John Winthrop even addressed this issue by objectifying England’s right to claim land that was not theirs. His rebuttal to his own objection (kind of weird how he wrote this) is “that which lies comon & hath never been replenished or subdued is free to any that will possesse and improve it, for god hath given to the sonnes of men a double right to the earth.” I mean, really? He also goes on to say that the English will provide more benefits for the natives than the land that they are actually on and that God has swept the natives with a plague leaving little inhabitants. These were all justifications to protect the English from any guilt that they might have had.

I wonder if the English had any idea that they were the ones to blame for the plague that was brought upon the natives. I mean, they must’ve suspected it a bit. If the natives were the only ones getting sick, then… it had to have been the English. Plagues just don’t happen. I guess that’s a bit modern to think that way, but nevertheless the English were so unrepentant for their doings. I wonder if they even thought they were doing anything wrong? It does seem as if there is a hint of guilt in Winthrop’s objections, however he makes it clear that there is no wrongdoing within his answers.

With hindsight bias, we can look back and say, “yeah, that was probably not the nicest way of handling foreign land,” but this was the seventeenth century. Empire was on their mind. No matter what, the end justified the means.

This is my new blog for my HIST 446 class.