The settlers of New England and the Chesapeake region may have migrated from the same origin, but that’s where the similarities end; by the 1700s, they differed socially, economically, and politically. As people began to migrate over to the New World, they started to adapt to the regions around them. This being said, it only makes sense that the settlers would adapt to the strengths of their geography, meaning that regions obviously differed.
Socially, the two regions had absolutely nothing in common. The New England population was mostly English and white and the church was established. It was family oriented. The colony was well organized and stable, which can be shown by the ship to New England’s passenger list, which listed the name, occupation, relationship to the head of the family, and their age (doc b). The people that migrated to New England were wealthy and important because of the organization of the list. The Chesapeake, on the other hand, wasn’t so put together. The majority of the population was black slaves, since plantation owners relied on their cheap labor. Here many people died from diseases like malaria and dysentery. Unlike the New England colony, the Chesapeake region lacked planning and women. Most of the people that migrated to Virginia were men. Because there were no families the men lacked motivation to work. They were all considered unimportant by England because there isn’t any particular order and only consists of their name and age (doc c).
Economically, the two regions’ theories were very contradicting. The Chesapeake region learned to survive on farming. The crop that saved Virginia was tobacco, but the regions also grew crops like rice. The New England region based their livelihood on livestock, furs, and crops like corn and pumpkins. Massachusetts made a covenant with God to believe in Him and share property evenly (doc d). Again in the New England, the people didn’t put money...