UMBC HIST355: Life in the Colonial Wilderness

This week we have two disparate observations of the "wilderness" in New England and the tobacco fields of the Chesapeake. Besides the obvious differences in when the two accounts were written (roughly 150 years separates the two), how can we account for such different approaches to understanding the natural world around these two authors? Why did Bradford see New England as "wilderness" and what was his intellectual lens for framing the environment in such a matter? Why was the other author less fearful of the new world he encountered in the Chesapeake? You may respond to any of these questions and/or offer your own comments and questions.

UMW HIST300F: Fighting for American Manhood

So were a bunch of insecure men, looking to play war, responsible for the War of 1898 and subsequent American imperialism? Did you find Hoganson's evidence convincing? Other thoughts or questions?

UMBC HIST355: Welcome to American Environmental History!

UMW HIST300F: Race Over Empire?

Historian Thomas Holt has argued that historically, white men in the United States have made race, but they have not always been able to make it do as they intended. Does Eric Love believe that is the case with those pro-imperial advocates at the end of the nineteenth century? Were you convinced that ideas about race were a hindrance to overseas imperialism?

UMW HIST300F: U.S. as Empire: Welcome!