Page locked

This page is currently locked for editing by another user. You have to wait until this user finishes editing or the lock expires.
Currently locked by: 216.73.216.97
Lock expires at: 2026/03/12 15:21 (15 min)
This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
====== Gentlemen and Soldiers ======

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)

===== Military Manhood =====

The descriptions of military life, and the changes that took place in relation to manhood stood out as a clear example of the way that manhood is ever changing and also related to various other factors. Factors such as social status. The article describes well to do men using the military as a way of maintaining manhood, whereas for lower class men the military was a way of obtaining manhood. This shows not only that there is a class related idea of manhood where your class decides where you start on the manhood scale, but also how ideas of what made a man a man changed between those classes. (Hannah Covin)

In Jamestown, more men ultimately chose to follow John Rolfe's way of planting tobacco and gaining profit in order to gain manhood. However, Gates and Dale's idea of obedience making a masculine solider shows remarkable similarities to modern military code which similarly emphasizes obedience to superiors. Additionally, this way of gaining masculinity in a martial setting contrasts earlier settlers' views of strength and ability to munity as true examples of masculinity. (Henry Prior)

In the mid-16th century, economic upheaval in England prompted changes in ways of "attaining" manhood that fed back into speeding up the societal changes. Feudal power structures provided a clear path to manhood for noble and villein. However, with the breakdown of feudalism, men needed to find new ways to attain manhood for themselves, either through the creation of their own household, or through military service. As men increasingly traveled off of the feudal properties of their birth in search of masculine independence, the feudal system broke down even faster. (Nick Thodal)
===== Manhood in Jamestown =====

In comparison to the puritans' ideas of masculinity the ideas of masculinity that the James Town settlers possessed was more based in the masculine ideals of the English military. Men were expected to be strong and not express emotion. Unlike the puritans, military men often found masculinity based in agriculture and domesticity as boring compared to the pillaging and conquest which military men's masculinity was based in. (Henry Prior)

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, and hostility. Their solution of integrating women into this environment is interesting because the colonial men never looked introspectively to solve issues, but instead enlisted women as gendered beings to soften the violence and hostility. (Why not bring over women and children initially?). This addition paved the way for racism, civilian patriarchal rule, and gender/power constructions. This is where Jamestown shifted from being a military installation to a civil installation. The idea of manhood has shifted many times up to this point, causing men to not only struggle with proving their masculinity (to each other) through means of power, money, land, etc while attempting to serve purpose to and provide for their household. (Reiley Gibson)

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, socially, there was conflict due to some people trying to maintain their gentlemen status and put down disobedience and other people trying to prove themselves as men by turning against the appointed leaders of the colony. How I see it, if these lower status men were sent to Jamestown because they were already not involved in the feudal system because they didn't want to live under a lord in England, they are still not going to want to be obedient under a military leader in Virginia. So, if they couldn't agree to work together in order to survive due to gender and status struggles, they had no chance at survival. (Katherine Hamilton)

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/power over. When it was only or mostly men, they had no one to assert their power over and so they fought each other in hopes of proving they were better than the other "weaker" men. So, when they were allowed to have families they were able to be in charge of people below them and this is likely why women were observed to soften the violence. They no longer had to fight each other to prove themselves. This plus gaining status through trade, for example tobacco, provided a much more peaceful way for men in colonial Virginia to gain, prove, and maintain their manhood. (Katherine Hamilton)

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's instability did not simply stem from the environmental conflict the settlers faced, but mostly from the conflicting definitions of manhood. Higher-class settlers saw their masculinity rooted in birth and status, while lower-class settlers saw the military as their way to manhood through physical strength and skill. This made it difficult for the men to decide and appoint a leader, which led to mutiny and was a large factor in the failures of the colony. (Callie McAleese)