mccurdy_gentlemen_and_soldiers
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| mccurdy_gentlemen_and_soldiers [2026/01/22 16:23] – [Military Manhood] nthodal | mccurdy_gentlemen_and_soldiers [2026/01/23 21:51] (current) – jjardine | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| This article overall made me consider the nature of manhood and gender in general, when related to using it to determine power, relies on clear exclusion. It is not enough to simply determine what it is to be a man, but the opposite must be clearly seen as well. This could be seen as simply being a matter of if there is no-one to exert power over, do you actually have any? (Hannah Covin) | This article overall made me consider the nature of manhood and gender in general, when related to using it to determine power, relies on clear exclusion. It is not enough to simply determine what it is to be a man, but the opposite must be clearly seen as well. This could be seen as simply being a matter of if there is no-one to exert power over, do you actually have any? (Hannah Covin) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The discussion of gentlemen and soldiers shows how manhood was defined through honor, discipline, and public reputation rather than purely physical strength. The reading contextualizes masculinity as a social performance shaped by class and military service, where gentlemanly restraint and soldierly courage both upheld authority and civic order. This framework reveals how early American society used ideals of manliness to legitimize power, hierarchy, and political participation.-- (Caitlyn Edwards) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The examination of British hierarchical structure and it's unique relationship to both social status and Military service allows for further understanding of the shifting social dynamics present both in later England and in the Jamestown colony. Seeing the norms surrounding manhood and status be challenged by the lack of structure in the colony serves as an excellent insight into how norms shift when strained by scarcity both in resources and social structure. ( J.D.J. ) | ||
| ===== Military Manhood ===== | ===== Military Manhood ===== | ||
| Line 10: | Line 14: | ||
| In the mid-16th century, economic upheaval in England prompted changes in ways of " | In the mid-16th century, economic upheaval in England prompted changes in ways of " | ||
| - | ====== Manhood in Jamestown ===== | + | ===== Manhood in Jamestown ===== |
| In comparison to the puritans' | In comparison to the puritans' | ||
| + | |||
| + | Upon settling Jameston, issues began to rise when a gender imbalance became apparent to Sir Edwin Sandys. He came to the conclusion that there are too many men present and results in violence, instability, | ||
| + | |||
| + | Manhood in Jamestown was defined by survival, labor, and the ability to maintain authority in an unstable colonial environment. Traditional English ideals of gentlemanly status often clashed with the realities of starvation, disease, and forced work. These conditions reshaped masculinity by prioritizing physical endurance and adaptability over inherited rank, revealing tensions between social ideals and colonial necessity.--Caitlyn Edwards | ||
| + | |||
| + | Manhood in Jamestown was in crisis because the hole that the decaying feudal system in England left was carried over to Virginia. So, while the colonists in Jamestown had to start from scratch infrastructurally, | ||
| + | |||
| + | John Rolfe was successful in creating a path to manhood in America because he reinvented the English feudal idea of manhood through status and being a patriarch and implemented it in Virginia. Through tobacco he gained wealth and status and through his marriage he became a patriarch. This way instead of having to be a servant before you could become a patriarch yourself (if you were lucky enough to have the opportunity to do so), you could start by taking over a piece of the bountiful land in America (you didn't have the problem of limited land as in England), farm tobacco to sell, and then when you had gained enough wealth take on a wife and children. Basically, you didn't have to work for someone else first, you could work your way up in status by working for yourself. (Katherine Hamilton) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Women not only increased the population of the Jamestown colony, but they also gave the men there a chance to have someone to assert their manhood/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | J. McCurdy’s account has many parallels with Romero’s study of Puritan and Native American masculinities. For example, the notion that masculinity is something to be performed. J. McCurdy demonstrates that early colonial Jamestown exemplified a clash of several masculinities. Each of these masculinities had a performative element. For example, John Smith’s version of masculinity assumed that masculinity was meant to be performed through hard work, strength, and teamwork, whereas for Gates and Dale obedience was the first performative component on the path to masculinity. At the same time, these notions coexisted with another idea of performative masculinity through plunder, conquest, and mutiny. These ideas of performative masculinities can be partially used to explain the instability of gender roles in early Jamestown. - Nikolai Kotkov | ||
| + | |||
| + | McCurdy argues that Jamestown' | ||
| + | |||
| + | The unique conditions presented by Jamestown with both it's geographic location as well as the period of time in which it was founded created an environment that constantly challenged the notions of " | ||
| + | |||
mccurdy_gentlemen_and_soldiers.1769099025.txt.gz · Last modified: by nthodal
