The Americas and the New World Order

The Americas and the New World Order:

Selected Essays on Latin America and Global Politics

Edited by Joshua Hyles

The Americas and the New World Order: Selected Essays on Latin America and Global Politics

Edited by Joshua Hyles

This book first published 2019

Cambridge Scholars Publishing

Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Copyright © 2019 by Joshua Hyles and contributors

All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

ISBN (10): 1-5275-3932-6 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-3932-7 TABLE OFCONTENTS

List of Figures...... viii

Section One: Perceptions & Power: Cultural Perceptions & Soft Power in the Americas

Chapter One ...... 2 American Knight, American Crusader: The Creation of Colonial Heroes Joshua Hyles, Baylor University

Chapter Two ...... 23 Indulgence & the Concept of Time in the Automobile Industry in Nuevo León, in Contrast with the Republic of Korea Alejandra Judithrza, Huerta Universidad Ruizespaevo Autónoma León de Nu

Chapter Three ...... 39 Symbolic Spaces: Adapting and Adopting Structures of International Power & Authority Janet Adamski, Claire Rebekah Phelan, Wood, University andary of M Hardin-Baylor

Chapter Four ...... 50 President Arias’ Use of Soft Balancing: Costa Rica and the United States Mucia Flores, Drake University School of Law

Section Two: Waves of People, Waves of Change: Migration & Immigration in the Americas

Chapter Five ...... 62 The Last of the Dons: The Decline of the Spanish-Speaking Californios following the Mexican-American War Todd Bernhardt, Boise State University

ChapterSix ...... 75 Spacism: Re-Contextualizing & Restructuring Forced Migration Studies Jason Boan, of University Texas San Antonio vi Table of Contents

Chapter Seven ...... 87 Legacies of HemisFair: Urban Renewal and Mexican-Americans in San Antonio Dylan O’Hara, University of Texas San Antonio

Section Three: Battlegrounds: Crime & Terrorism in the Public Eye

Chapter Eight ...... 108 Is Mexico’s Democracy Under Threat? Effects of Fear & Corruption in Mexico James A. Norris, Texas A&M International University

Chapter Nine ...... 130 #Radicalization: Effect of Social Media on Recruitment to Jihadist Groups Kanika Varma, University of Texas at Austin

Section Four: Trading Power: Commodities and Economics in the Americas and Beyond

Chapter Ten ...... 156 Sweet Relations: Analysis of New World Sugar Cultivation Madeline Clay, University of Mary Hardin-Baylor

Chapter Eleven ...... 166 The Siege of Havana and the Future of Cuba Regan Murr, University of Mary Hardin-Baylor

Chapter Twelve ...... 176 Ecuador’s Financial Relationship with China under the Correa Administration Christian Rodas, Ohio University

Chapterirteen Th ...... 206 China in Latin America: Economic Soft Power & Taiwan Lawson Sadler, Baylor University

The Americas and the New Worldvii Order

Section Five: Eastern Impact: Political Change & Independence in Asia

Chapterurteen Fo ...... 218 Does Socialism Bring Equality? The Impact of Socialism in Asia David Bomar, Concordia University Texas

Chapterfteen Fi ...... 228 The Implausibility of a Kurdish State Jared Martin, University of Mary Hardin-Baylor

LIST OFFIGURES

1. Chart 2.1: Hofstede’s Dimensions 2. Chart 2.2: Globe Study: South Korea and Mexico 3. Table 2.1: Authors and Dimensions for Time and Indulgence 4. Table 2.2: Quantitative Instrument 5. Table 2.3: Reliability Analysis 6. Chart 2.3: Survey Results for “Time” 7. Chart 2.4: Survey Results for Indulgence 8. Table 2.4: Pearson Correlations 9. Figure 6.1: Migration Concept Map 10. Chart 8.1: Mexico. Percent Choosingr Crime, Narco-Trafficking, o Lack of Security 11. Chart 8.2: Mexico. Percent Statingry Current Level of Crime is Ve Much a Threat 12. Table 8.1: 2012. Family and Own goSafety Compared to Five Years A 13. Chart 8.3: 2012. Percent Claiming Police Solicited a Bribe 14. Table 8.2: Frequency Table of Satisfactioncy with the Way Democra Works in Mexico 15. Table 8.3: OLS Regression on Satisfactiony with the Way Democrac Works in Mexico 16. Table 8.4: OLS Regression on Democracy as a Preferred Form of Government 17. Appendix 8.1 18. Chart 9.1: Increase in NumberActivity of Arrests for Islamic Terrorist in the E.U. 19. Chart 9.2: Increaseber of inRadical the Num Twitter users 20. Table 9.2: Result from Model 2 21. Table 9.3: Result from Model 3 22. Table 9.4: Result from Model 4 23. Chart 9.2: Arrestsc Terrorism for Islami in Austria 24. Chart 9.3: Arrests for Islamic Terrorism in Belgium 25. Chart 9.4: Arrests for Islamic Terrorism in France 26. Chart 9.5: Arrests for Islamic Terrorism in Germany 27. Chart 9.6: Arrests for Islamic Terrorism in Italy 28. Chart 9.7: Arrestsrrorism for Islamic in the Netherlands Te 29. Chart 9.8: Arrests for Islamic Terrorism in Spain The Americas and the New Worldix Order

30. Chart 9.9: Increaser of Female in the Foreign Numbe the Fighters in E.U. 31. Figure 9.1 32. Figure 9.2 33. Table 11.1: Loans from China to Ecuador 34. Table 11.2: Ecuador’s Oil-for-Loan Deals with China

SECTION ONE:

PERCEPTIONS & POWER: CULTURAL PERCEPTIONS & SOFT POWER IN THE AMERICAS CHAPTERONE

AMERICANKNIGHT , AMERICANCRUSADER : THEC REATIONCOLONIAL OF HEROES

JOSHUAHYLES BAYLORUNIVERSITY

For over two centuries,ns have addressed historiaf the the concept o American hero. Which are the quintessentialan hero or qualities an Americ icon must possess? Which shortcomingsl of that and flaws guarantee denia same hero status? Those who writehora American of history enjoy a plet candidates for study, includingefore those even individuals made famous b the “founding fathers.” Two ofities, these pre-revolutionary personal William Penn and John Smith, survivea much- to the present, albeit in altered form, in film, legend,iner. and Thosethe occasional oatmeal conta concerned with writing history,h though (including Penn and Smit themselves), bearor the responsibility figures’ or enduring infamy. f fame How writers ande storytellers portrayed the havVirginia Quaker and the colonist, particularly overcentered the past upon century, has been a study relationships. In discussing these relationships,ed there are many well-document avenues upon whichhistory the writer can travel. ing of the After read available materialsmost popular on both, respective theries of catego association becomeh men apparent. are judged Botaction on their inter with their families, their forayseir dealings into matters of the heart, th with political colleaguesonal quests, andction their pers in self-refle their own writings, and their treatmentir world. of the Indians who shared the From these multiple interactions, the most enduring and dynamic relationship of all emerges—thatrians between who the hero and the histo form, mold, and write their respectivew historians stories. By exploring ho over the past century have dealt, one with can these associative spheres develop both a pictureese two men of who were thven and, more perhaps e importantly, who Americans want them to be. American Knight, American Crusader3

Fathers and Sons

William Penn’s history is inexorably linked to his father. Most histories and biographies of erPenn on begin his with at least one chapt father, Admiral William Penn.graphers One of Penn’s most meticulous bio and eloquent apologists, William that Admiral I. Hull, is quick to point out Penn’s naval triumphs, particularlye Dutch at his victory in 1665 over th the Battle of Lowestoft,primary reason is the iam the was younger Will ever granted a charter 1 to In colonize Hull’s biographies Pennsylvania. there is never a doubt that Williamowed a deep Penn, for better or worse, debt to his father’s glory. An lsford’sentire work, Mabel Richmond Brai The Making of William Penn, concentrates on the asymmetric relationship between the gifted and glorious father and the upstart son. The admiral, already born to aCaptain seafaring family (his father was Giles Penn, another well-respected2 achieved his rank shipmaster), in 1648 partially from his skillfulfully seamanship, cultivated partially from his care friendships with English nobility.ral of His appointment to Vice-Admi Ireland was secured by friends, Lord nobles Broghill and Lord Inchiquin who managed to remain influentialmwell’s in the turbulent years of Cro parliament.3 Brailsford suggests this promotion, which gave the admiral the funds necessaryf the to pox move and out plague-riddenty o and into ci the country village of Chigwell,am not only benefited young Willi medically but also won him an excellented education at the renown Chigwell Grammar4 Thus, School. even the quality of education provided to William was linked to his father’sr school fame. Beginning in gramma and continuing into law school,were the institutions Penn attended carefully selectedal; this by thewas admirnoime accident. of great In a t religious upheaval, believed, Penn’s according fatherPenn to noted historian Vincent Buranelli,igiously that his son should receive as rel neutral an education5 The as could removal be obtained.of religious education in favor of a schoolld where be societal relationships cou cultivated with other elitesy seemed way to to the admiral to be to onl protect his son’sm a turbulent future fro culture.

1 WilliamWilliam Hull, Penn: a Topical Biography (London: Oxford University Press, 1937), 9. 2 Mabel R. Brailsford,The Making of William Penn (London: Longman, Green, and Company, 1930), 6. 3 Ibid., 24. 4 Ibid., 26-27. 5 Vincent Buranelli,The King and the Quaker: a Study of William Penn and James II (Philadelphia:Philadelphia University Press, of 1962), 25. 4 Chapter One

Buranelli’s assessment of Admirald by Penn’s school choice is echoe Hull, who describes “neither Chigwell Papal as suggests nor Puritan” and that Penn’s own capable writingere. in6 history may have developed h Earlier Penn biographer G. Godfraynn were Sellick, whose studies of Pe published in the late 1920s, alsoinfluence makes note of Admiral Penn’s and choice. It was at Chigwell andthat then Oxford, Sellick writes, William developed crucial connectionscontinued to the elite society and to build upon his respected7 family name. It was this ubiquitous surname a that concerned Penn—it was both blessing and a burden. Later inbreak life, Penn would never seem to completely free of his father’s Brailsford bequeathal of name-recognition. suggests that the were father “forever andn sontied the political together” i arena, and thatone the Penn exploits were attributed of to the simply family rather than8 A later the individual. biography by Catherine Owens Peare echoes this assessment,and suggesting names that the Penns’ lives were inseparable, and despiteen any father personality differences betwe and son, what “befell9 one befell the other.” Penn’s embrace of Quakerism is a often seen at least partially as reaction to his family fame. Adea denomination of that rejected the i nobility and privilege, Quakerismnative. provided an interesting alter Though it would strip Penn of eall possessed the benefits and advantages h as a well-connected young man,cum it would of also provide him a modi freedom and a “clean slate” he words had not of possessed before. In the Penn family historian Arthur Pound,d provide the Society of Friends woul the younger William with both distance a new from his family name and society in10 which The decision to fit. to become a Quaker, whether made in a fervent revelationa calculated or decision,by affected profoundly the relationship between William Penn by all and his father, and is marked Penn historians as a crucial momenthistorical in Penn’s first significant relationship. The souring of the relationship is between the admiral and his son addressed most deeply in the works Before by Buranelli and Brailsford. even his adoption of Quakerism,ionship there with were signs that the relat

6 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 68. 7 G. GodfrayWilliam Sellick, Penn: Quaker and Colonist (London: Epworth Press, 1929), 16. 8 Brailsford,Making of William Penn, 256-257. 9 Catherine OwensWilliam Penn: Peare, a Biography (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1957), 111. 10 Arthur ThePound, Penns of Pennsylvania and England (New York: Macmillan, 1932), 92. American Knight, American Crusader5 his father was in jeopardy. Buranelli early 1662, illustrates the events of when Penn was discovered as havingp at joined an anti-Anglican grou Oxford. The Penns were seen andamuel documented together (often by S Pepys) at many London social events, for the and it was a crushing blow admiral to hear that his son wasds of fraternizing people with just the kin who were most disliked by11 theIt was, upper as crust Buranelli of society. points out, a rejection by youngmoral Penn of “society” in favor of integrity. But it would strain p the father and son’s relationshi considerably.12 The later arrest of his son for his presence at a Quaker meeting came at the worst possibleome time—Admiral Penn had lost s connections in government, hisakening, position at the Admiralty was we he had lost his seat in parliament,ting. and his health was degenera Buranelli’s biography suggestseen thatfather the tense relationship betw and son worsened after the Quakering incident, for but had been declin some time because of Penn’s13 Brailsford rebellious draws actions. many of the same conclusions, finallyppointment determining that the real disa to Admiral Penn was his son’s unwillingnessily name to carry on the fam which, by the time of William’sciety, convincement into the Quaker so had recovered enoughe elder to Penn earn the14 th rank of earl. Despite the shortfalls of theird relationship, the admiral worke diligently to care for his sonprisonment and work for his release from im (due, of course,er to connections), William’s hisQuak andfather Penn and were fully reconciled admiral’s before death.’s the own Clearly, view Penn of family and its honor was profoundlyents affected by the developm between him and his father. After would Admiral Penn’s death, William honor his fatherNo in Cross, his No Crown great by including work him in a section of quotes15 This by deep “great love men”. and respect for his father, though in constant disagreement his own with him, carried on to children. Penn is noted for havingdest son sincere attachment to his el Springett, who preceded his fatheringett in as death. Penn eulogized Spr his “closest and16 dearest friend”. The details of John Smith’s familyently bylife are treated much differ historians. The relationshipis with nearly family, father, and heritage ignored by most biographers ofus Smith, on the who choose instead to foc historical context and cultural crucial background to and treat it as more

11 Buranelli,The King and the Quaker, 29. 12 Buranelli, 28-29. 13 Ibid., 37. 14 Ibid., 189. 15 Ibid., 167. 16 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 43. 6 Chapter One

Smith’s development than his familyho has history. Everett Emerson, w written several biographical since and historical the treatments of Smith late 1980s, devotes his entire the first chapter to the “America of Elizabethans.”17 Though this could be the result of a lack of documentary evidence of the Smith family asenns, compared to the more affluent P there is one work, by Emerson contemporaryt does R. E. Pritchard, tha concern itself with the parentageritchard, of John Smith. According to P Smith’s parents George and Alice middle were farmers of the yeoman, or class.18 Pritchard usesinventory both a will from and George Smith’s estate to discern some materialJohn information on the Smiths, and himself writes positively about.19 It both is his parents in later years perhaps more because Smith’sheir parents world, were less influential in t and not because they left insufficient tend to ignore records, that historians their influence on young John. Smith expert PhilipThe Three L.Worlds Barbour’s of Captain John Smith does speculate a bit on the captain’sh only family beginnings, thoug enough to cite the same inventoryt that as the Pritchard, and to point ou Smith family was just “a step above‘mere’ the total obscurity of the peasants.”20 Just as in most other Smith biographies, Barbour’s work focused more on the context ofy, the spending period rather than the famil twelve pages on the events surroundingt, while the wars on the continen only setting aside two for discussions21 The focus of John’s father George. on context rather than family doesthe not seem to be a product of historiographical period, either.y with Smith biographies contemporar Penn’s family history-intensiveer’s studies, 1928 like John Gould Fletch biographyJohn Smith—Also Pocahontas, still only devotes three pages to the discussion of George Smithn.22 and his relationship with his so Two texts do suggest some contrast to the Penns’ father-son relationship, though more indirectly.of John David A. Price’s history Smith is peppered with referencesing on to Smith’s rebellious, border mutinous, personality. Despiteward William Penn’s own proclivity to

17 Everett H.Captain Emerson, John Smith (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1993), 1-20. 18 R. E. Pritchard,Captain John Smith and His Brave Adventures (London: Haus Publishing, 2008), 5. 19 Ibid., 8. 20 Philip L.The Barbour, Three Worlds of John Smith (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1964), 4. 21 Ibid., 4-16. 22 John GouldJohn Fletcher, Smith, Also Pocahontas (New York: Brentano’s, 1928), 1-3. American Knight, American Crusader7 rebellion, he absorbed enougher influence working from his father to pref within the system, as Godfrayhe Sellick “system” states (in Penn’s case, t was the English23 Smith, royal however,court). inherited no such attitude from his father. As Price remindsmpletely readers, Captain Smith was co unwilling to work for change from affect within, but instead sought to change by his24 own actions. The only real mentionaternal of influence directh isp on John Smit made, oddly enough, by an authorve Foster, of children’s history. Genevie who used legendary personalitiesnd like Smith, Abraham Lincoln, a George Washington as central figuresy in a broad world history b exploring the history of thek world a somewhat during their life spans, too “softer” approach toward Smith’spresumably relationship with his father, for the benefit ofThe young World of Captain readers. John Smith, In Foster paints ae portrait actively of involved arecounting mor father by the period of Smith’s apprenticeship, and to merchant Thomas Sendall clearly giving George Smith fullnticeship credit for arranging the appre and even suggesting it to his rousson, Johnfully aware that the adventu had no desire to 25become Barbour,26 Fletcher, a farmer.27 and Pritchard28 all mention the apprenticeship,Fletcher but barelygive it very short shrift. credits the father at all, while John Pritchard Smith reminds readers that himself wrote that his father hirteen, was dead by the time he reached t though his apprenticeship did29 Whatever not begin until age fifteen. influence John Smithherited may or have gained iner, from his fath historians seem to reach consensuso way as by omission that it was in n strong gthyor as as len Penn’s.

Quests of the Heart

Romance factorsographical into the histori treatmentnn and of both Pe Smith, but while the pangs of loveWilliam were most certainly felt by Penn, their very best existence unclear iswhenohn at Smith.discussing J While Penn’s marriagee with Gulielmaand romancinly Springett had certa

23 Sellick,William Penn , 71-72. 24 David A.Love Price, and Hate in Jamestown: John Smith, Pocahontas, and the Heart of a New Nation (New York: Vintage Books, 2005), 50-51. 25 GenevieveThe Foster,World of Captain John Smith, 1580-1631 (New York: Scribner, 1951), 68. 26 Barbour,Three Worlds, 9. 27 Fletcher,John Smith, Also Pocahontas, 7. 28 Pritchard,Captain John Smith and His Brave Adventures, 7. 29 Ibid. 8 Chapter One the trappings of a fairy tale,ed their folklore. relationship never permeat Conversely, all American childrenn Smith are aware of the story of Joh and Pocahontas,re and treats popular it ascultuat one romantic of the gre tales of American history. Pocahontasith’s instead married one of Sm colonists, and whether or not omanticthere was ever any semblance of r love betweensubject the two is of the stringent debate. Another author of children’s nds history, a Elizabeth Janet Gray, spe great deal of time on the subjectSpringett’s of William Penn and Gulielma courtship and marriage. Freshfather from the to a heartache of losing his somewhat premature death and hisaker release from prison for his Qu activism, William found that Gulielmar and Springett, a fellow Quake stepdaughter of Isaac Quaker Pennington, apologistin the had become, words of Gray, “morehan ever, beautiful becauses t of the her lovelines spirit shone30 Gray in her stresses face.” that Penn’s abundant writing talent was not limited to religiouss, but was tracts also and colonial charter utilized in letters of love to un the to “Young Convinced” he had beg court.31 If the romance between William and Gulielma was confined to the pages of a history for children,arded. it could potentially be disreg However, the research into thet relationshipwithout done by Gray was no precedent. William Hull also wrotemacy of of the importance and legiti Penn and Springett’s courtshipotes and a subsequent marriage. Hull qu letter from Pennr to their Gulielma tenth aftewhich anniversary, he in calls her “the love of my youth…theloved, joy as of my life; the most be well as the most worthy32 The of vividnessearthly comfort.” of William and Gulielma’s love for one anotherw surviving is manifest despite very fe references made to her durings their between marriage, other than letter her and her husband. Due to her ielma mother’s illness and death, Gul actually never accompaniedo Pennsylvania, Penn primary and t remained a cause for his return33 to England. The importance of Gulielma to William Penn is also reflected by Sellick, who proposes that itnsylvania was not the copious issues in Pen causing William’s swift returnth to of England, his but the failing heal wife. Guli, Sellick believes,rity was the in prime mover and sole prio Penn’s life, superseding dreams of religiouseven34 Despite his liberty. William’s actions and examplesielma’s of love during the marriage, Gul

30 ElizabethPenn Janet (New Gray, York: Viking Press, 1938), 150. 31 Ibid., 111. 32 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 33. 33 Hull, 36. 34 Sellick,William Penn: Quaker and Colonist, 105. American Knight, American Crusader9 importance and influence inhis Penn’s reaction life is to best illustrated by her death. In WilliamJohn Penn: Graham’s Founder of Pennsylvania , the author focuses on Gulielma’s deaths life. as a crucial moment in Penn’ Penn’s own words, quoted in theuietly work, more than suffice: “She q expired in my arms, her head uponwell my bosom…she was a public as as a private loss: for she wasother, not only but an an excellent wife and m entire and constant35 In selecting friend.” this passage from Penn’s writings, Graham best illustratesn the the undoubted love resident i marriage. John Smith’s love life, like sokier— much else about him, is far mur and debated much more fervently by historians—than Penn’s. Most readers are at least semi-awarentas. of the The tale of Smith and Pocaho basics—that Pocahontas halted p the of execution of Smith in the cam Powhatan and later warned him ofer an own impending attack, risking h life in the process,lly agreed are genera upon ans by Smith and histori biographers, though their interpretationshe of the events vary. T historiography on the “romantic”s and relationship between Pocahonta Smith has experienced ebb and flowsome over the past century, with historians coming to the defensest coming of the fairy tale, but with mo down on the side of skepticism.Love and Hate in David Price’s Jamestown uses the second event (Pocahontas’ middle-of-the-night, life endangering warning to Smith) feelings to suggest that there were strong of attraction36 He further at work. suggests that Smith’s own accounts should be given extra weight,present since he at was the only chronicler the scene.37 Not everyone is asmith’s convinced romantic ofhe S portrayal of t story. Emerson points out significants of the story differences in the detail as reported by Smith in A his True Relation two and longest books, Generall Historie of Virginia.38 John G. Fletcher, usually a pro-Smith historian, goes so far as to accusesm, citing Smith of a type of plagiari Hernando de Soto’s similar talecess of redemption in by an Indian prin 1539 and suggesting that Smith may have read Richard Hakluyt’s translation39 Dorothy of it. and Thomas Hoobler give a good historiographical overviewCaptain of John the varying viewpoints in Smith: Jamestown and the Birth of the American Dream.

35 John WilliamWilliam Graham, Penn: Founder of Pennsylvania (New York: Stokes, 1917), 230. 36 Price,Love and Hate, 103. 37 Ibid., 68. 38 Emerson,Captain John Smith, 37. 39 Fletcher,John Smith, Also Pocahontas, 127. 10 Chapter One

The Hooblers pointpticism out that is certainly skend not new, a historians’ attacks on Smith haves been fervent since Henry Adam published his first criticalwever, assault they on the subject in 1867. Ho concede (along with Adams himself)eally that a the critical work was r self-serving onetilizing in hopes a “big ofh u target”to further like Smit Adams’ own historical40 Whether career. or not the relationship between Smith and Pocahontas was true, the folklore two and history have linked together in a special and prophetictween two way, often as the “nexus be civilizations.”41 David Price still gets the last word here, though—despite any romance, prophecy,mith’s relationship or fate,ontas S with Pocah ended like so many of his othernother associations: (his he loses her to a own colonist,lfe), John and Ro is received in London by her rathera coldly few years42 Thus, later. the relationship becomes an allegory for the life and dreamsmith of himself. S

The Protagonists’ Quills

Both Penn and Smith took up their, each own lives in writing. As such was his own first biographer andt authors first ofhistorian. The subsequen history have not been shy to considerbjects. theFor words of their own su Penn, life was about arguing for Quaker a cause, and he argued for his beliefs on paper more than anywherenn spent else. A prolific writer, Pe considerable time at the quill.eapon The the pen, indeed, was the only w Quakers could truly yield, andhus, their leader was no different. T historians have focused on correspondencery criticism and historical litera when discussing Penn more thanWilliam quantitative or social history. Hull praises his subject for tproviding of primary such a significant amoun material from which to work, pointingearly four out that Smith produced n treatises a year a million and over written halfrds.43 and printed wo Sellick considersation Penn’s as a writer, proliferding thatas well, ad in Smith, the Quakers found a champion.ieving Though Penn grew up bel in the power ofbecame the sword, equally he effectiveing the in wield written44 In word. spite of his mastery of words, William Penn rarely wrote about himself. Arthur Poundugh Penn reminds his readers that, tho was talented at many things, self-promotionere and autobiography w

40 Dorothy and ThomasCaptain John Hoobler, Smith: Jamestown and the Birth of the American Dream (Hoboken: John& Sons, Wiley 2006), 131. 41 Ibid., 234. 42 Price,Love and Hate, 162. 43 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 155. 44 Sellick,William Penn: Quaker and Colonist, 28-29. American Knight, American11 Crusader hardly his45 strong Penn’s suits. own treatment of himself could hardly be defined as ostentatious or flashy,m have and those who write about hi followed suit. John Smith’s historians workEverett with a different writer entirely. Emerson, who has done the mostnd work study in the literary criticism a of Smith’s publications, leadsctively an abundance of historians who a distribute and discuss the captain’spaltry in writings, though they are comparison to the46 volumeEmerson of suggests Penn’s. that, from the study of Smith’s writing style,irginian it is onlylikely the transplanted V wrote out of necessity, in orderase to salvage his career or incre investments47 inThis his is dream. not to say that Smith was disengaged from his own writing. Historianhy Karen for Kupperman, in her biograp the Institute of Early Americanhat HistorySmith’s and Culture, declares t publications hadinite a clear purpose: andgave def he purposefully himself a legendary48 In character. Smith’s accounts, he is always the “knowing protagonist”. In all his writings,s far more which include his own action than Penn’s, Smith declares that wanted he “toldto the truth, but no one hear49 Theit.” idea is echoed in the historiesout and biographies written ab him since. A significant part of Smith’srom controversial his personality stems f writings. His penchant for hyperbolecher’s text, and flair is noted in Flet where the authoras claims disposed Smith to “w enlargeexploits upon his the older he became, and to make further out more he of a case himself the got away from his own50 adventurous Emerson posits years.” that this exaggerative literary style was the as much to entice investment in Virginia colony as to increaserather Smith’s own reputation. After a shameful departuren, John from Smith Jamestow attemptedral on seve occasions to findother sponsors American for supportcolony, an seeking from Francis Bacon in 1618, writing and to guilds in London in 1619 1620, and citing his own experiencegrims about in a sales pitch to the Pil to depart for New51 EnglandHis efforts in 1621. on paper never achieved his goals across the sea. Hiss failure writings to is achieve action from hi

45 Pound,The Penns , 105. 46 Emerson,Captain John Smith, 21. 47 Emerson, 22. 48 Karen Ordahl Kupperman,Captain John Smith: ed.,A Select Edition of His Writings (Chapel Hill: rthUniversity Carolina of Press, No 1988), 33. 49 Ibid., 75. 50 Fletcher,John Smith, Also Pocahontas, 19. 51 Emerson,Captain John Smith, 30-31. 12 Chapter One perhaps explained best by Barbour,n of who describes Smith as a “ma performance,52 not ideas.”

Politics, Quests, and Colonies

Historians focus on William Penn’sinly success. Though he was certa not without failures, the majorityonists, of the his interactions with col monarchy, and his friends are heredocumented is a in a positive light. T certain morality to all of Penn’sout, mostexploits and, as Hull points biographers see Penn’s theologyo his and ethics as forever married t politics and53 dailyVincent conduct. Buranelli’sThe King and the Quaker follows a similar line of thought,right explainingand that Penn’s forth frank speech (quintessentially well- Quaker in nature) was not always received, but his suggestions with and advice the were always well timed mood and spirit of54 the In Buranelli’s rulers in power. estimation, Penn’s ability to stay detached, as andneither neither an Anglican nor a Catholic particularly favorable to thegave king him nor a dangerously derogatory, special audience and legitimacy55 Catherine in the Peare eyes of the king. concurs, “Penn’s exceptionald position Quaker of being both Cavalier an made him a liaison between the uringtwo, and the there were many times d years that followed when his associationsurt counted and friendships at co heavily in the cause56 of religious liberty.” Mary Maples Dunn who, along withas her husband Richard S. Dunn, h written numerous texts on Penn,earch sums in up the majority of her res William Penn: Politics and Conscience. Dunn’s book gives William Penn’s adept political maneuveringonograph’s further consideration; her m title even suggests the immutableand outer connection between the inner workings of Penn’s political life.ciety His of convincement into the So Friends, Dunn argues, presented. His a new challenge for his talents training, hisce, family’s and his influen personalityhim for a lifeprepared in society and politics,d to be successfully but itwith ha his mingled newfound religious57 Dunn sees interests. the apex of this juggling of conscience and court politicsp as and Penn’s trial for public worshi disorderly conduct. His desirer to his publicly declare and argue fo

52 Barbour,Three Worlds , 293. 53 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 171. 54 Buranelli,The King and the Quaker, 57. 55 Ibid., 201. 56 Peare,William Penn: a Biography, 75. 57 Mary MaplesWilliam Dunn, Penn, Politics and Conscience (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967), 10. American Knight, American13 Crusader fundamental rights (specifically with the freedom of the soul) coincides well-documented evolution of judiciary the jury as a free and independent body, and the climax, the jailing jurors and for subsequent release of the delivering a verdictce, is perfect of innocenians fodder looking for histor for a sea change58 Penn’s in Penn. transformation from a firebrand with a ready willingnessfor to a cause take up to armsand a grand verbal orator defendant of an entire denominationf the was complete by the close o trial.59 Dunn’s biography does not ignoreat Penn’s setbacks. She argues th Penn’s sudden interest in theleast idea partially of religious liberty was at influenced by his disillusionmentions, from in a series of failed elect which his good friend Algernoniament Sidney was denied a seat in Parl despite winning the majority of Penn. votes60 and the strong support of Throughout his life, the Quakerglish remained heavily invested in En government and the king’s affairs court, ofo thebut Pound’s according t interpretation of the Sidneyusioned failure, with Penn had become so disill the state of English politicsthan that starting he saw no a alternative other fresh government for his Quaker61 brethren in the New World. The father of Pennsylvania’sid mixture move of politics and morality d his plans for the colony forward.eady The “holy experiment” was alr preplanned, established, andts built of the in Penn’s mind. Thus, accoun colonization focus far less uponan the the journey to Pennsylvania th plan’s formation in England andn arrival. the colony’s implementation upo The journey, in Pennsylvania’sWilliam case, was inconsequential. Only Hull attemptedMayflower-like any account of the trip. Penn benefited from a well-planned, well-funded cites operation as that Catherine Peare the primary cause for his successust.”62 She and such an “atmosphere of tr goes on to suggestssociation that Penn’s withnists” a “agreeable is of colo primary importance 63 to Tenacious his historic adherence success. to his conscience did not come withoutt Penn a price. was Sellick points out tha not without enemies, particularlyly had after the Pennsylvania assemb been firmly established and theonists more selfish motives of the col began to diverge from64 thoseDunn agrees, of the founders. going on to

58 Ibid., 13. 59 Sellick,William Penn: Quaker and Colonist, 23. 60 Dunn,Politics and Conscience, 41. 61 Pound,The Penns , 165. 62 Peare,William Penn: a Biography, 218-219. 63 Ibid., 280-281. 64 Sellick,William Penn: Quaker and Colonist, 136-137. 14 Chapter One say that Penn’s embrace of freedomhis and tolerance of others was eventual undoing65 in his own colony. John Smith’s personalitysimilar to was Penn’s moreians than histor generally have readers believe.mith Like had a Penn in his early years, S history of non-compliance. Alsobout like Penn, Smith learned much a himself and the rest of the worldE. Pritchard as a soldier. However, as R. writes, Smith’s experiences withas awarfare in Eastern Europe and prisoner in Turkey were much moreized” visceral and much less “civil than Penn’s service in the66 This army suggests in the Netherlands. Smith would have a far different way ofviewed viewing the world, and how he himself. Pritchard goes on to ncerned suggest that Captain Smith was co chiefly with knighthood,y, and gallantry. chivalrself Smith as the saw him bearer of these and antique how Penn qualities, saw much himself to had do with his actions, historians’ andtrayals thenose por with of actions. 67th For Smith, unlikey of Penn, the experiment the glorjourney, was in the and not in the idea; the personalityntly in the of the captain is consiste background of writingsthis end,are on there similaritiit.es To drawn by historians to theMayflower voyage when discussing of the the voyage to Virginia.Love andPrice’s Hate in Jamestown , for instance, devotes nearly an entire chapter on the voyage—itut a part was not a means to an end, b of the adventure68 Even for in Smith. dealing with the voyage, historians of the voyage illustrate an unfortunate inability weakness of Smith’s—his to work with others. Arthur Innes,rkLeading author of the comparative wo Figures in English History, describes Smith as getting into a “bad odour [sic]” with his shipmates almosttions immediately, of leading to accusa attempted69 Pritchard mutiny. suggests that Smith’s eventual failure could be traced back to colonists unwilling and to work under the captain uncooperative70 As in the his Hooblers ideas. would later point out, this was an unfortunate situation fort well- Smith, who was clearly the mos trained and technically knowledgeableolonists,71 of all the new Virginia c but at the mercy of others to get far the from colony a running, as it was one-man operation.72 As a matter of fact, according to Philip Barbour,

65 Dunn,Politics and Conscience, 163. 66 Pritchard,Brave Adventures , 27. 67 Pritchard, 10-11. 68 Price,Love and Hate, 15-29. 69 Arthur D.Leading Innes, Figures in English History, Tudor and Stuart Period (Freeport, NY:ibraries Books for Press, L 1967), 200. 70 Pritchard,Brave Adventures , 144-145. 71 Hoobler,Birth of the American Dream, 78. 72 Ibid., 76. American Knight, American15 Crusader

Smith spent the majority of hisntly first working months in Virginia dilige under the supervision of others73 Genevieve in an attempt to get ahead. Foster would add that his hard workause isit even more impressive bec was done despite being barredcouncil. from74 participation in the ruling No one has doubted Smith’s capacity for hard work. Though Captain Smith was clearly brave, intelligent, and hard- working, he lacked modesty—a crucialn component of any Englishma trying to work within the system.clare Dorothy and Thomas Hoobler de this deficiency to be the primarymies, reason Smith made so many ene both in his own time and 75in It the was circle this inability of historians. to work with and through others thatnn had caused Smith to fail where Pe succeeded—establishingncial backing strong atman’s fina home. Kupper text stresses this inabilityason as aSmith’s fund-raiser as another key re colonizingas adventure a personal76 He w was, failure. in Barbour’s words, more a soldier than a politician,s actions and this as a was made clear by hi governor, where he handled bothf strength, Indians and colonists by rule o and fear if necessary,77 Unlike rather Penn, than Smith’spersuasion. belief in equality did not stem for af religiousin human stance or a deep belie rights, but a utilitarian78 view only. Smith’s motives were, however,nded pure. His pragmatic rule was fou in his deep desirea to succeed for Virgini and New his World love for the itself. He was “addicted to theorian New World”and in the words of hist biographer 79 Noel and Gerson,Denis Meadows,Five Remarkable in Englishmen, described Smith’s love for Virginia as “undeniable” and his personality as “indistinguishable”80 His New World from the colony itself. infatuation is illustratedarticularly for historians his in his own actions, p repeated requests to help set describedup another colony in New England, by Fletcher as a 81“thirst It was Fletcher, for return.” too, who summed up John Smith’s character as itdealings related towith his colleagues and his

73 Barbour,Three Worlds , 77. 74 Foster, The World of Captain John Smith, 208. 75 Hoobler,Birth of the American Dream, 169. 76 Kupperman,Captain John Smith, 250-251. 77 Barbour,Three Worlds, 194-195. 78 Ibid., 148. 79 Noel B. Gerson,The Glorious Scoundrel: a Biography of Captain John Smith (New York:, Mead, Dodd 1978), 153. 80 Denis Meadows,Five Remarkable Englishmen: a New Look at the Lives and Times of Walter Raleigh, Captain John Smith, John Winthrop, William Penn, and James Oglethorpe (New York: Devin-Adair, 1961), 49. 81 Fletcher,John Smith, Also Pocahontas, 272.

16 Chapter One the government. He described e,Smith but asnot having, “brilliant courag deep wisdom; grappled for power,hrough but nota the power that comes t deeper understanding of humanerations limitations…revealed to later gen most of the virtues and failingsof of our …race in their schemes colonization.”82 While Pennsylvania was a colony in need of a man, John Smith was a man in need of a colony. A bit more of Penn and Smith’s toriesrespective personalities and his can be discerned treatments from historians’ ofan each policy. man’s Indi Brailsford suggests Penn’s positivens was relationship with the India based on his friendship with Indian his own sympathizer Josiah Cole and religious83 Hull piety. subscribes to the same theory, stating that Penn’s religious convictions, particularly, strongly pacifism and human equality influenced the Quaker’s policyghbors. toward84 Pennsylvania’s Indian nei In the first biographies of Penn,ians,pax it a is this peace with the Ind Pennae of sorts, which is moved to theans fore by early American histori as Penn’s greatest85 It did contribution. not hurt that Penn’s peaceful relationsedibly were incrsuccessful.86 Smith’s relationship with the re Indians of Virginia is treated mo gingerly by his biographers andtings Virginia about historians. In his wri the native peoples, Smith bordersways on ethnography. Though not al willing to cooperate with them,rstanding he did strive of for complete unde their culture, as87 KuppermanMost historians suggests. agree, though, that this should not be confused with Indian sympathy or championing of the cause by the captain. Emerson claimssted in Smith was much more intere the Indians as a “natural88 andcuriosity” though Arthur than as a nation, Innes reminds readers’s personal that prestigeSmithIndians among the was immense,89 Pritchard counters that Smith’s handling of the Indians was done so expertly because heecause understood he their culture, not b respected90 John them. Fletcher’s work takes it a step further, noting that the Virginia Company saw Smith’s Virginia attitude toward the Indians in

82 Ibid., 295. 83 Brailsford,Making of William Penn, 341. 84 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 122. 85 WilliamEight Hull, First Biographies of William Penn, in Seven Languages and Seven Lands (Philadelphia: Patterson & White, 1936), 26-27. 86 Graham,Founder of Pennsylvania, 161. 87 Kupperman,Captain John Smith, 139. 88 Emerson,Captain John Smith, 49. 89 Innes,Leading Figures, 205. 90 Pritchard,Brave Adventures , 71-76. American Knight, American17 Crusader as “needlessly91 and that cruel,” he saw himself as a leader “destined by God to save the colony from92 Indeed, the peril Price of the is Indians.” quick to point out that the policyrginia of “non-defense” by other Vi governors toward the Indians,st a approach, policy similar to Penn’s pacifi infuriated93 Smith.

Sentences of Fame and Infamy Delivered

All of these associations and of relationships color the attitudes historians toward these two giantality, figures. In describing person historians over the past centurygly similar have described Penn in strikin terms with Smith. Sellick statesd the restlessthat the, “Salt of the seas an airs of adventure were in the bloodnia.”94 of the founder of Pennsylva Others take a similar stance towardnd their Penn’s inner personality, a words could just as easily beenhat written Penn of Smith. Hull claims t had a spirit of non-conformity,dvantage, but95 was able to use it to his a while Mary Dunn describes“personable” him as butle” alsoto a “excitab fault.96 John Graham portrays him as ostentatious, but defends him from blame by suggestings put theto use flair for97 Finally,wa a just cause. Elizabeth Gray suggests that Penn’sfrom “need for danger” kept him being just a married98 The country interesting gentleman. thing to note here is that, despite these seeminglynn’s negative portrayals of Pe personality, each historian isize quick his to defend him and rational behavior. Two events seem to influence thism willingness to support Willia Penn. First, his adamant and inspiredis court defense of Quakerism in h appearance was history’s first certainly judgment on him, and he was most at his best when the99 Incidentally, spotlight was the on. first published biography of Smith was done by la defensefellow Quaker, so his masterfu of the faith loomed large in rthe biographers text and set the pace for othe to come.100 Secondly, Penn’s embrace of peace and piety is difficult to

91 Fletcher,John Smith, Also Pocahontas, 234. 92 Ibid., 152. 93 Price,Love and Hate, 38-39. 94 Sellick,William Penn: Quaker and Colonist, 12. 95 Hull,William Penn: a Topical Biography, 77. 96 Dunn,Politics and Conscience, 6. 97 Graham,Founder of Pennsylvania, 124-125. 98 Gray,Penn, 152. 99 Graham,Founder of Pennsylvania, 58. 100 Hull,Eight First Biographies, 3. 18 Chapter One argue against. His plan for peacey ahead with of the Indians was certainl its time, a fact not101 Tolost Edward on William Beatty, Hull. who studied Penn as a social philosopher, termsthe Quaker of was above reproach in his adherence to the policiesion. 102of In pacifism the and religious tolerat “give and take” that distinguishesides Penn histories on Penn, Beatty ch lightly for being a protector his of position rights to property only due to as a landholder,103 but subsequently praises him for his progressive stance on access to public health careof and his education, ideas far ahead time.104 Even Penn’s decline in popularityyed and success was still portra by Beatty as noble, as the coloniale focus founder on a possessed an intens goal and purposew through that he until 105sa his death. Unfortunately and conversely, John Smith’s faults are quickly embraced by historians. Gersonhe captainportrays, in his opening page, t as loving glory more106 Ten than pages anything. later, he points out that Smith’s military experience ticwas fighter,as a mercenary, not as a patrio and even a mercenary only becausewn.107 the French army turned him do Smith’s imprisonment for “mutiny”tes was likely because his shipma considered his actions as insurrectionff”, as coming from the “riff-ra opposed to disagreement108 from a fellow gentleman. This poor startaphy to Smith’s that is biogr so places often put forth historians hoping to paint aSmith more positive on the portrait of Captain immediate defensive. Philip Barbourfor Smith, appears to be an apologist but fights an uphill battle fromexaggerations, the start. He defends Smith’s reminding readers that all Stuartf the literary writers embellished as part o style of the day. To Barbour, hety”…a is “innocent until proven guil scoundrel Americans all109 Still, wink about Barbour’s and accept. main defense of Smithnged: is easily “Nothing challe wrote John Smith has ever been proven110 In a Laura lie”. Striker’s preface to Henry Wharton’s early biographicalThe Life of Johnwork Smith , she claims to give testimony on

101 Ibid., 8-9. 102 Edward Corbyn WilliamObert Penn Beatty, as Social Philosopher (New York: Columbia University Press, 1939), 162. 103 Ibid., 209. 104 Ibid., 289. 105 Ibid., 15-16. 106 Gerson,The Glorious Scoundrel, 1. 107 Ibid., 10-12. 108 Price,Love and Hate, 30-31. 109 Barbour,Three Worlds , 394. 110 Ibid. American Knight, American19 Crusader behalf of111 In Smith. Smith’s defense, Wharton himself goes back to the chronicles of the in Hungary captain’s as atimees soldier those to and us confirm pieces of Smith’s112 It seems autobiography. as though Penn historians merely have to documentpraise, the obvious and confirm the while those writingfight on their Smith way mustconnotations past negative before beginning their real study. Perhaps this also stems from Smith’sss to failures and his willingne impart his frustrations to otherser set on on paper. With a heart “forev brave adventure,”113 John Smith set out with high hopes and diligent activity, only to life a life, as Meadowsated.” would114 put it, of a “hope frustr Though Barbour rushes to Smith’sth story defense, claiming that the Smi is a “continuous story of purposed not intendin action,” and that Smith di to become a vagrant but insteadself- possessed a vision and goal of achievement, the foundationale writing and on John Smith as a failur shameless self-promoteralready too 115 firmlywas placed. It is important to note here thatave William Penn and John Smith h been judged twice—first by othersstorians in their own time, then by hi with a more modern viewpoint andtive bias. Penn seems the more posi subject because his ideas, particularlyors, are more about his Indian neighb accepted in thisSmith’s century, were though certainlyinstream more ma in his. Comparing the declinesareers of Smith has and Penn’s respective c led to an ultimate question forinion historiography—is that the modern op Penn’s goal of pacifist tolerance Smith’s was more “morally right” than hope of self-promotion the keyrgiving factor of making historians more fo Penn’s failures than of Smith’s?timates It seems and that in a world of ul absolutes, modern historians havee tended to portray Smith as th quintessence of all that was mistaken as the in colonization, and Penn example ofas all noble that about w it.

Two Men, One American Character

Studying the historiography neof texttwo divergent personalities in o is not always advisable—there an are be often more differences than c explained. However, discussionsrginian of the in Pennsylvanian and the Vi the same consideration possessand merit. William Penn was as torn

111 Henry Wharton,The Life of John Smith, English Soldier (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1957), 7. 112 Ibid., 55. 113 Foster,The World of Captain John Smith, viii. 114 Meadows,Five Remarkable Englishmen, 91. 115 Barbour,Three Worlds, 83. 20 Chapter One tormented as hisrpart. Virginian Elizabeth countethe Gray sums up achievements of Penn: his requests own for Pennsylvania came from hi hand, but succeedednfluence from of the his cohis father’s king’s honor, respect, his friend’s vision,116 Though and he hisenjoyed mentor’s visits. being a colonist, Penn was clearlyly, and torn between colony and fami between the New World117 But and the England. key to his historiographical treatment, Brailsford remindsilures us, is have that his sufferings and fa always been considered fleetingliberate and temporary because of the de permanence of his mission118 and his adherence to it. John Smith’s case, as usual,tes is moreSmith difficult. Gerson illustra as completely rejecting119 and gentlemanly eventually farm being life, surrounded by failure120 Even and for depression. Smith, though, historians have attempted kindness.r illustrated Philip Barbour in particula the captain’s diligence and hist infuriated courage, noting that he was mos by cowardly121 Meadowsbehavior. also reminds readers of Smith’s own motto—“to conquer122 Foster is to adds live.” that Smith would have rather been a knight, but123 wasThough born dogged in the by wrong time. failure and letdown, and dying ith’s alone and dejected, enough of Sm courage and hard work shines throughrayals tohis gloomier historic port allow him retention of his legendarygic hero quality. Though more a tra than a conquering one, John Smith’salling adventure to remains too enthr leave alone. Both men were and are defined bys— their relationships with other family, love interests, the politicalread their realm, the audiences who books, and, ultimately, the historiansFrom the who have analyzed them. pens of the historians, and then heroes figures themselves, two America have been given to modern readers. venture Captain John Smith, eager to into the Unknown and make his ownlliam fortune, shares pages with Wi Penn, who desired nothing more orld than to perfect a place in the w through tolerance and brotherhood.g, The different, and convergin accounts of theistory’s two illustrate definitionser” h and of “explor “pioneer”, and shownds of that man both could ki be considered “Americans,” with a combinationrous of courage, compassion, adventu

116 Gray,Penn, 181. 117 Ibid., 221. 118 Brailsford,Making of William Penn, 352-353. 119 Gerson,The Glorious Scoundrel, 23. 120 Gerson, 157. 121 Barbour,Three Worlds , 253. 122 Meadows,Five Remarkable Englishmen, 93. 123 Foster,The World of Captain John Smith, 68.