The Establishment of Old and New Ebenezer Town - Research Paper Example

The establishment of Old and New Ebenezer Town Ebenezer town is a non-existent town in Georgia United salong the riverbanks of Ebenezer Creek. It found its way to the US listing as the Ebenezer Town site and the Jerusalem Lutheran Church in the year 1974. The founders of this town were the Salzburger Protestants from present day Austria. Their move was because of their expulsions from Archbishopric of Salzburg. The town moved closer top the Savannah River1 in the year 1736 where it saw the opening of a number of silk mills. Moreover, the spiritual leader of the town, Pastor Boltizius Martin Johann strived to build a religious haven for the town, which led top the economic growth of the town. In this regard, the completion of the building of the Lutheran church was in 1769. However, the British invasion severely damaged what the town had accomplished that led to the not so full recovery of the town. On the contrary, Ebenezer town served as Georgia’s capital for a short time despite the fact that it had never fully overcome the adverse effects of the British invasion of 1778. With this in mind, this essay will be to delve in the establishment of both the old and new Ebenezer town during the eighteenth century. It will also illustrate the effects of economics and the politics surrounding the town’s establishment. Further, the essay will dwell on the town’s decline and eventual death using traveler’s accounts. They will include notes from James Oglethorpe’s journal and other relevant primary sources. In addition, it will give the reasons for migration and settlement of people in the old and new Ebenezer town. The rise of Old Ebenezer Johann Boltizius led the establishment of the city on the Hill2 commonly referred to as Ebenezer where he felt like he had the spirit of excellence in him. He attempted to make a society piest through his pastoral skills from Halle in Prussia. Pietism was a Lutheran movement that inspired spiritual leaders within the Lutheran3 church to start the Methodist and the Brethren movement. It encompassed vigorous Christian living and individual piety. On the other hand, John had the responsibility of ensuring that the Ebenezer attained economic and religious goals. Remarkably, he coupled as tremendous administrator and a clergyman through the effective balancing of his spiritual duties and those of his European patrons. Ideally, he was able to sustain Ebenezer survival by balancing the congregational needs of the Americans in Ebenezer with the needs of his colonial authorities in England and in Georgia. Part of the laws of the Georgian community under the British rule was that no Roman Catholic was to settle in the Georgian territory. Additionally, the colonialists banned rum4 consumption and presence within the colony, as a disciplinary measure. Moreover, women could not inherit land meaning that landownership was a manly affair. The rulers of the time had a vision for the newly acquired colony through the refugees to form a branch of the religious model in the pietist ministry. In this regard, Ebenezer became a German enclave through the reproduction of economically independent aspects and socio-religious self-governed territory. The Salzburger arrived in modern day Effingham County in 1734 where King George II and the Georgian trustees welcomed their settlement within Georgia province. The Protestants arrived in Georgia because of the Roman Catholic dismissal of their protestant religious attributes. Their main desire was to attain religious freedom, which they found in Ebenezer town. However, Ebenezer was a different city from other towns because of its adaptable ability to ape other institutional structures. Moreover, the town was not ideal for human settlement because of its swampy nature hence limiting comfortable survival of populations. The Salzburger 5blended well with the occupants of Ebenezer since they worked hard and had the same religious ideals like those of the British trustees and colonialists. Additionally, they viewed slavery as an infringement on the rights of individuals making them have similar morals to those of the British settlers in Georgia. This was despite its refugee and utopian creation state. On the other hand, other visionaries like August Francke contributed in the development of learning aspects within the town through the promotion of education among the poor and the under privileged in society6. He was an advocator for reforms in any possible form. The training in the incepted schools had deep Christian values bestowed upon them. Francke’s ideologies had the evangelical reforms aspects in that they were similar to those of the Protestants denomination. In addition, he emphasized on Ebenezer being an economic and social replica of Calvinism of the Dutch reformers. Ideally, previous persecutions among the Salzburger created a stronger bond between those from Halle and those from Anglican knowledge. Therefore, Ebenezer was a minute community with intense belief in God, conversion witnessing by individuals, and faithful practice of Christian doctrines. There spiritual leaders like Boltzius excommunicated the Ebenezer people who did not practice repentance as part of the faithful practice7. Boltzius documented all these doctrines in journals that he sent to Urlsperger for printing and editing. The economic state of Old town Ebenezer The interest of the mother colony was to see that Ebenezer become an economically and spirituals productive colony. This had to be through its ability to be self-reliant and self-sufficient in order to raise capital to support charitable effort of the mother colony in the acquired territory. Ideally, Francke’s charitable works drew funding from donations and the sale of from the commercial enterprises within the orphanage. Therefore, Francke’s orphanage established a stable financial support system within its network where the idea saw its replication across the Ebenezer territory. For instance, the pharmacy within the orphanage sold medical supplies to and the printing press published various religious literature and bible translations as part of its economic activities. These institutions employed a sizeable number of the Ebenezer population in effective of the orphanages8. Sequentially, Ebenezer established agricultural and mill works with the intention of achieving economic success like the Francke orphanages. This translated to Ebenezer’s success as a Halle’s pietist colony through education and charitable traits. In addition, the colonizers of Ebenezer wanted the colony to be a replica of their own origin. Original home was welcoming to the persecuted Europeans and the poor. They provided an opportunity for growth and betterment9. For instance, the Halle offered each household of Salzburger with fifty acres of land as a way of improving their poor state through farming. Subsequently, the Halle or the British trustees also sought to prevent slavery that many other regions within the American continent experienced. The fifty-acre maximum distribution of farmland was a way of inhibiting unequal land ownership and distribution. Ebenezer became a buffer zone between the Carolina and the Spanish Florida hence making the vision of land by the British equal to support this course. The unavailability of slaves within this region was essential in that they could not join forces against the colonial authorities of Ebenezer then wage war on them. However, the initial plans by the British to develop the colony into an economical stable province through justice and fairness changed. This was because of the inception of slavery where the slaves worked on their masters’ plantations10. After Francke’s death, the economic status of Ebenezer plummeted due to the decreased funding from the mother colony. Sequentially, there was the emergence competition among the residents of Ebenezer to attain economic stratification. This was in line with the attributed growth towards American nationalism, which led to London’s diminishing interest in the colony11. Additionally, Boltizius implemented his intended objectives against a number of challenges that included unfavorable environmental hurdles, political instigations from the mother colony, adequate labor provisions and foreign economic ideologies. In contrast, these were against his initial ideas on the development of community structures that would promote economic ventures12. With each hurdle, Boltizius had to counter check it with the initial Pietist objective for Ebenezer’s benefit. Political structure in Old Ebenezer James Oglethorpe was a British member of parliament, philanthropist, and an initial founder of Old Ebenezer town. He was a visionary leader who facilitated the political system old Ebenezer town. He helped settle the poor and the less fortunate form Britain hence raising their quality of life. Through his petition, the first batch of released prisoners departed for Georgia where they would settle down and embark on agrarian equalities13. They arrived in South Carolina in 1972 together with the first batch of colonialists from Britain. According to his journals, James interacted well with the chief from the Yamacraw tribe in which he managed to strike land deal between his country and the natives of the Savannah territory. On the other hand, two crucial individuals facilitated the colonization of Georgia. One of them was chief Tomochichi14 who was the chief of the Yamacraw Native Indians. The other was Mary Musgrove, who was the daughter of an English merchant and a creek native mother15. In essence, Tomochichi travelled to England then convinced his subjects that the British only had honorable intentions for them. However, Mary’s role was that of a translator between the native chief and Oglethorpe in which she established peaceful ties between the Creek Indians and the British colonialists. The three were the main catalysts in ensuring the colonization of the Savannah territory and giving birth to Old Ebenezer town as part of the Georgian colony. Ideally, he and his fellow colonialists had acquired a charter for the occupancy of the province of Georgia. For Britain, the shipping of the ’worthy poor’ to Old Ebenezer ridded the country of its so-called undesired elements. A substantial number of the colonialists of Georgia were the Scottish whose skills immensely assisted in the development of Georgia. Primarily, the Scots were also intensely against slavery within their territory and within the Georgian colony. For instance, the Scots introduced animal rearing and timber harvesting as part of Georgia’s income generating practices. Additionally, the Scottish assisted the trustees in the successful battle against the Spaniards out of Georgian territory in 1736. In essence, they were a Scottish army who also participated in the colonization of Georgia. This went down in history as the battle of Bloody Marsh where the Scottish built a fort at Darien in order to protect the colony against future Spanish Florida attacks. The battle of Bloody Marsh helped the Trustees16 to regain their lost glory two years earlier after the loss at St. Augustine. In essence, the battle was at St. Simons Island along Georgia’s coastline because of the Spanish Florida attempt to raid Georgia during the War of Jenkins’ Ear17. He built forts and made sure a group of six hundred men had the best military training and war equipment. However, the Spanish fought back with a counter attack on St. Simons Islands18. Ideally, Oglethorpe treated the Creek natives with utter value and respect, unlike other colonialists. This portrayed his compassion mate nature since he cared most for the well-being of others whom society had neglected. Remarkably, he managed to establish a colony, which the released debt prisoners from England could live free and worship with ease. He managed to build a society that had justice, morality, and was religiously up right. Ideally, Georgia derived its name from the then king of England, King George II. Fundamentality, philanthropy, economic empowerment, and defense systems were the main reason for the need to create the Ebenezer colony and colonizing Georgia. The colony fell under the rule of twenty British men who the King of England had bestowed the responsibility of leadership. Their grouping was the trustees charged with the task of brokering treaties for the Britain with the Native Americans. The change from Trustee to a Royal colony (New Ebenezer) Subsequently, the departure of Oglethorpe in 174319 after a remarkable exploit of the Georgian colony symbolized a new chapter for this colony. The Trustee colony became a Royal colony that had different economically supportive policies. The recalling of Oglethorpe by the British government was a milestone for the malcontents since their grievances finally saw the light of day. Ideally, the royal colony 20established had different aspects of land ownership. For instance, the Trustees formulated a land policy in which the British settlers could buy and sell land as they pleased. Additionally, the settlers large plantation had many slaves working on them since the settlers were now able to buy as many they needed this meant that those with larger plantations were financially stable. This widened the relations between the average landowners and the large estate owners through the development of social classes. In effect, the Georgian border increased southwards stretching towards River St. Mary’s and River Mississipi21. This new and expanded territory characterized the development of this colony in to one that was economically self-reliant. Malcontents and their contribution to New Ebenezer’s economy Ideally, every society has to have malcontents within it in order to enable it strike a balance from within itself. Essentially, malcontents in a society are the generally dissatisfied elements with the running of the societal affairs and tend to be rebellious. In this regard, the Georgian society did not lack the elements who expressed displeasure and the Trustees policies. According to the New Georgia encyclopedia, the malcontents complained about everything during the initial settlement process of the British in to Georgia in 1735. The malcontent leaders were Patrick Tailfer and Stephens Thomas. In excess, the malcontents22 did not have monetary funding from the mother colony during their arrival hence creating animosity between them and the trustees who the British government had given monetary aid. Their views were cognitively different from those of the Trustees hence making their loyalty to the colony’s founders impossible. In addition, they objected the fifty-acre land limit and the no slavery policies established by the Trustees. They felt that the policies were unfair to them since they were able to buy more chunks of land and slaves from their own money. Therefore, they limited them from exercising their full economic potential as settlers. Additionally, the prohibiting of rum to them was unacceptable since it was an infringement on their pleasure. Patrick organized a group of colonial settlers in to objecting the activities of the Trustees between the 1737 and 173823. For instance, the group wrote a formal petition in 1738 and circulated it to call for the immediate change of the colony’s administrative style. Most of the malcontents left the colony in 1740 after the Trustees refused to amend the laws that they sought to alter. The petition had a hundred and twenty one signatures from residents of the colony. In contrast, William Stephen, the father to Thomas Stephens, wrote a memoir to the Trustees that showed contentment by the population on the economic state of the province. Ideally, the memoir implied that the people enjoyed the Trustees way of governing that was in contrast to the actual feeling of the Georgian people. In a rejoinder, Tailfer wrote an article that sought to give the true narrative of the Colony of Georgia, which sharply refuted Stephens’ claims. In essence, Tailfer’s objective was to portray to the British legislature that the policies by the Trustees were an obstacle to financial success for many of the colonial settlers in Georgia. Sequentially, the British government listened to the malcontents’ petitions, but they did not result to any immediate response. In addition, the Trustees remained as the managers of Georgia irrespective of the filed complaints against their policies and rule. Moreover, Thomas Stephens also wrote another pamphlet representing the dissatisfaction of the malcontents24, which was not successful in bringing down the Trustees. However, the subsequent passing of a law allowing for slavery in 1750 drew influence from the constant petitions by the malcontents. In this regard, the malcontents claimed victory when the Trustees permitted unlimited land ownership and slavery after the departure of Oglethorpe. Therefore, the lifting of the slavery ban25 translated to immense economical abilities for the New Ebenezer town. Moreover, the slaves were a critical contributor to the New Ebenezer economy because their output mapped the town among the significant financially successful towns in Georgia. For instance, the slave workers worked towards the increased productivity on rice, mulberry, grapes, and indigo plants within the vast plantations. With the increase in the settlers’ land portions; they capitalized on making economic advances through the increased cultivation of crops intended for sale. In effect, the economic state of the Royal colony improved drastically making it a rich colony. The major contributors to this improvement were the slaves and the plantation owners who competed amongst each other for the overall financial benefit of the new colony. The New Ebenezer reformed political structure Sequentially, the government structure in this colony also changed as governors replaced the old Trustees. The king appointed the governors of the colony directly from England who repealed the policies of the Trustees. In addition, the colony embraced the democratic system of government in that the males with immense wealth participated in the formulation of policies regarding the operations of the colony. Ideally, the colony became self-reliant and self-governed where the colonialists had more freedom than in the previous trustee colony. Sequentially, the Royal colony developed an efficient justice system that was impartial in the delivery of justice. These court systems had the task of settling disputes among the settlers without involving the larger British legal system. Arguably, the governors appointed directly by the king of England added immense value to the newly founded Georgia royal colony. For instance, John Reynolds26 the first governor of the colony implemented self-governance, and helped set up improved court systems. However, the king revoked his services because of his poor relations with the Creek Indians that made his reign unpopular within the colony. In addition, the colony continued to be poor during his tenure as governor. Henry Elis became the second royal governor after Reynolds’ recalling by the British government. Essentially, her leadership was better than that of her predecessor because she managed to restore the sanity of the colony. She also managed to reform the old system of government by establishing parishes within the Georgian colony. In contrast, she also established lasting ties with the Creek Indians who in turn became receptive of the British rule. As a result, she became the people’s choice kind of leader since she valued every one including the Native Americans27. This made her respected and appreciated in a large part of the Georgian Royal colony. Finally, James Wright became the third from last governors to rule the Royal colony whose popularity surpassed those of his predecessor. In essence, his popularity was mainly to his ability to increase the geographic territory of Georgia28. With this increase, the economy of Georgia also became expansive that led to the increase in population. Primarily, the population grew because of the occupants of the colony did not have to worry about food insecurity because it was in plenty. Conclusion The old and new Ebenezer were distinct in their political, economic, and social structures influenced from various factors. In essence, the old town had limited capabilities of economic expansions due to the policies set by the Trustees and Oglethorpe. However, when the colony became Royal and policies in existence revised, it became more prosperous since the colonialists were able to till more lands than before. In addition, the success of the town would not have been possible were it not for chief Tomochichi and his interpreter Mary Musgrove since they facilitated the colonization of Georgia by the British and the settlement of the British settlers on Old Ebenezer town. The British rule on both times of Georgia had its different impacts, as both the eras were beneficial to the settlers and the Creek Indians. Finally, the fall of the old Ebenezer and the rise of the new colony brought with it slavery and suffering of the population aside from the economic growth. Slaves within the newly formed colony lost their rights and freedoms. They only lived to serve their masters and not to fulfill their lives. In this regard, the establishing of the new Georgian colony went against the fundamental ideals of the old town Georgia, which were religion and morality. In essence, the New Ebenezer was the exact opposite of the old Trustee town. Bibliography Asatiani Nodar., Janelize, Ot’ar. History of Georgia : from ancient times to the present day, (Sydney : House Petite publishing, 2009) Blocker, Jack S., David M. Fahey, and Ian R. Tyrrell. Alcohol and Temperance in Modern History: An International Encyclopedia 1 A – L, (Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2003). Cobb, James C. Georgia Odyssey, (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2008). De Quesada, A. M. A History of Florida Forts: Florida's Lonely Outposts, (Charleston, SC: History Press, 2006). Georgia Historical Society. Collections of the Georgia Historical Society, (Madison: University of Wisconson, 2012) Graham, Ian Charles Cargill. Colonists from Scotland: Emigration to North America, 1707-1783. Baltimore, Md: Genealogical Pub. Co, 2006. Harcourt Multimedia Biographies. James Oglethorpe 1696-1785. Available from: http://www.harcourtschool.com/activity/biographies/oglethorpe/ [Accessed 8 Nov. 2012] Hill, Samuel S., Charles H. Lippy, and Charles Reagan Wilson. Encyclopedia of Religion in the South, (Macon, Ga: Mercer University Press, 2005). Hoffer, Peter Charles. The Brave New World: A History of Early America, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006). Jackson, Harvey H., and Spalding, Phinizy. Forty Years of Diversity Essays on Colonial Georgia, (Wormsloe Foundation Pubns, 2011). Jennison, Watson W. Cultivating Race: The Expansion of Slavery in Georgia, 1750-1860, (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2012). Joiner, Don. Antebellum Churches in Georgia ([S.l.]: Lulu Press, 2007). Mis, Melody S. The Colony of Georgia: A Primary Source History, (New York: PowerKids Press, 2007). Moreshead, Ashley E. the Salzburgers “City on the Hill” the Failure of a Piest vision in Ebenenezer, Georgia, 1734-1774, (Florida: University of Central Florida, 2002). Russell, David Lee. Oglethorpe and Colonial Georgia: A History, 1733-1783, (Jefferson, NC [u.a.]: McFarland, 2006). Shearer, Benjamin F. Alabama to Kentucky. Westport, Conn. [u.a.]: Greenwood Press, 2004. Rake, Jody Sullivan. Georgia, (Mankato, Minn: Capstone Press, 2003). Sonneborn, Liz. A Primary Source History of the Colony of Georgia, (New York: Rosen Central Primary Source, 2006). Spilling, Michael, and Winnie Wong. Georgia, (New York: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark, 2009). Sullivan, Buddy. Georgia: A State History, (Charleston: Arcadia Publ, 2010). The New Georgia Encyclopedia. History & Archaeology. Available from: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-808[Accessed 8 Nov. 2012] Read More