Chapter 6: The Duel for North America
1. Why was the French Empire ultimately so much less successful than either the Spanish or the British Empires? The French were less successful then both the Spanish and the British because they were late to jump to the gun on the race to claim land in the new world, by time the French stared colonizing the new world the British had already settled on the east coast, and the Spanish in south America, so basically they had to take what is now known as Canada by default, because that is all that was left.
2. If France, instead of Britain, had won the “duel for North America,” would the thirteen colonies ever have become independent of Britain, or would they have been forced to stay within the empire for protection against France? Would Detroit, St. Louis, and New Orleans now be cities in Canada rather than in the United States? Yes, they still would have become independent because no matter who controls North America, the colonies would still have felt the need to break away from Britain, it may not have been under the same circumstances or the same time period, but it would have still happened
3. How did the treatment of Americans by British officers and the military, during the war, contribute to simmering resentment against the mother country? Do the attitudes and behavior of the colonists during the war suggest that Americans felt less real patriotic loyalty to Britain and that the ties had become largely practical ones? The way the British officers treated the Americans during the revolutionary led to the Americans having even more reason to want to rebel, yes by this time America has settled in, it was becoming more and more independent every day, it was only a matter of time until America had no use of Britain and would eventually want to become their own country
4. How important was William Pitt’s leadership in winning the Seven Years’ War? Is strong political leadership essential to military victory? Is strong political leadership or strong military leadership more important to winning a war? What about during revolutions? Yes, strong leadership inevitable will win you anything, George Washington was a great military general and single handedly won the war between America and Brittan by himself, if it had been any other general in charge 99 times out of 100, America would have lost, he also turned out to be one of the best politicians to date.
5. From Britain’s perspective, were stationing soldiers in the New World permanently and issuing the Proclamation of 1763 good colonial policies? What problems were these policies trying to address? How else might have Britain solved those problems while limiting colonial contempt? As far as Britain could see, yes, it was a good idea, it would combat any resentment towards Britain and squash any though of rebellion, but the idea was not implemented enough to enforce the laws which lead to the American Revolution actually becoming something
Chapter 7: The Road to Revolution
Evaluate the system of mercantilism. What were the benefits for Britain and for the colonies? What were the costs to Britain and to the colonies? Is the system of mercantilism sustainable or will colonies inevitably revolt? Mercantilism essentially is a monopoly, it locked the trade of the colonies to only Brittan, that gave them a constant buyer for their crops, but it also cut their profit because if England had too much and prices started to deflate, they would just sell it off to other countries at double the price they bought it for
2. Was the American Revolution inevitable? Could America have gradually and peacefully developed independence within the British Commonwealth, as Canada later did, rather than engaging in a violent revolt? At what point in time, if any, was a violent revolt inevitable? What could the British have done to stop the Revolution? The American revolution could have been thwarted as soon as the signs started...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document