New England vs. Chesapeake Regions

            The Chesapeake region, in comparison to New England’s motives, sought out a more economic gain approach to settling the New World. Joint stock companies were the hidden reason behind colonization. Striking it rich was the goal and many were quick to take a boat to the New World. In the Chesapeake area the abundance of gold was non-existent, yet it was still the initial reason to migrate there. Captain John Smith in 1624 said himself that the worst among the migrants were “the gold seekers who with their golden promises made all men their slaves in hope of recompenses”. Captain John Smith lived through the main motives of men migrating to the Chesapeake, and also lived through the consequences of “brawls” so “disgustful…they were better forgotten”. In contrast to John Winthrop’s vision of “a city upon a hill contrasts, John Smith’s retelling of fights, and “disgustful brawls” and the horrible, gold seekers” clarified the distinction in motives to migrate to the New World between the New England Colonies and the Chesapeake colonies.

            The composition of people that moved to the Chesapeake region was not diverse in profession, gender, or age. A Virginia’s ship list written in the same year as the ship list of emigrants bound for New England, reported almost six times as many men than women with no apparent relation or profession. These young men under oath of allegiance to the Church of England became dedicated workers in the Chesapeake colonies. In the 1700’s under the head right system between 100,000 to 150,000 indentures servants came to the region to work on plantations. Many of these young men sought out land that could not be gained in England. As a result there were very few women and children in these areas. Life in regions such as Virginia was dangerous because of Malaria and other diseases; family life was slow to develop. While close family ties existed in the New England colonies, more dedicated workers lay in the Chesapeake region. 

            The Chesapeake regions were governed by formed layers of “men of states”, “servants”, and “freemen”. In places like Virginia, they were populated by the middle class settlers, many of which were indentures servants and African slaves.  Berkeley represented the government of Virginia in an address to the parliament. He laments and pleas in his time of crisis when attacked by the Dutch. In the government, he states his short supply of “men of trust” which lead to the conclusion of the weak governing in the Chesapeake regions. Nathaniel Bacon justified the rebellion against Berkeley’s govern, and showed that the aristocracy was full of nothing but “sponges”, “unworthy favorites”, and “juggling parasites” who had very little regard for the well being of the inhabitants. Virginia’s colonial government structure was very similar to England’s county courts and differed from the theocratic government of Massachusetts Bay. The assembly met regularly, not so much for representative government but for the opportunity to raise taxes. The way governing the people focused greatly on the economic interests rather than the emphasis on the population of a good life.

            New England held religious bonds when migrating to the New World. In contrast the Chesapeake region had little diversity in people and a hunger for economic gain. New England governed its people under the influence of God and a fair “right” to property and wages. Even though the Anglican Church was establishes in Virginia a great distinction was made when the Chesapeake regions were handled under an economic perspective rather than an emphasis on the well being of the people. Motives, the types of people, and governing strategies all played a role as to why the regions of the New England colonies and Chesapeake colonies had evolved into two distinct societies.