Summary: The Influence Of The Proclamation
Emily Ellison
Historiography summary
December 12, 2016
Article #1
The influence of the Proclamation of 1763 during the American Revolution has been interpreted in several ways. Many historians argue the proclamation ended tension after 1768, since the treaties made access available to vast lands for settlers. Historian, Woody Holton argues even though the boundaries was pushed towards the west in future treaties, British government denied permission to new colonial settlements. They excused this with being scared of evoking war with Native Americans, which angered colonies, and traders. Historian Jack Stagg, argues the declaration made to the Indians in the Proclamation were short term and temporary, only meant to mollify the Native Americans who were progressively were acting offended and angry with new settlers on their lands. They thought, that these new settlers were competent of becoming a …show more content…
This led to historians such as H. J. Eckenrode to argue that the Proclamation was only a ‘paper barrier’ that could not restrain settlers from crossing The Appalachian Mountains and establishing farms. Historians were faced with the fact that families have been slipping across the Proclamation Line. H. J. Eckenrode believed that the line barrier was unsuccessful amongst traders, and colonists. Although, Woody Holton proves this notion wrong, since settlers were separated into different classes which varied on different interests. Theda Perdue and Michael D. Greenpoint ponder how colonists would have felt angry over this mere “paper barrier.” Once the colonies started to resent the proclamation, this caused a division between the United States. Therefore, this leads Pro- Indian historians to believe that the proclamation was also ineffective amongst
Historiography summary
December 12, 2016
Article #1
The influence of the Proclamation of 1763 during the American Revolution has been interpreted in several ways. Many historians argue the proclamation ended tension after 1768, since the treaties made access available to vast lands for settlers. Historian, Woody Holton argues even though the boundaries was pushed towards the west in future treaties, British government denied permission to new colonial settlements. They excused this with being scared of evoking war with Native Americans, which angered colonies, and traders. Historian Jack Stagg, argues the declaration made to the Indians in the Proclamation were short term and temporary, only meant to mollify the Native Americans who were progressively were acting offended and angry with new settlers on their lands. They thought, that these new settlers were competent of becoming a …show more content…
This led to historians such as H. J. Eckenrode to argue that the Proclamation was only a ‘paper barrier’ that could not restrain settlers from crossing The Appalachian Mountains and establishing farms. Historians were faced with the fact that families have been slipping across the Proclamation Line. H. J. Eckenrode believed that the line barrier was unsuccessful amongst traders, and colonists. Although, Woody Holton proves this notion wrong, since settlers were separated into different classes which varied on different interests. Theda Perdue and Michael D. Greenpoint ponder how colonists would have felt angry over this mere “paper barrier.” Once the colonies started to resent the proclamation, this caused a division between the United States. Therefore, this leads Pro- Indian historians to believe that the proclamation was also ineffective amongst