Answer scholarly, completely in professionally written content? Citing when necessary


Answer very briefly the following questions according to Gallay’s book. Answer briefly in sentences of your own words as much as possible. SOME Answers do not need to be in complete sentences. Please type your brief answers using bold text.

According to Alan Gallay, in  The Formation of a Planter Elite: Jonathan Bryan and the Southern Colonial Frontier (1989)


1. What is the main argument, the thesis, of the book?

2. Section TWO 1 “The Southern Frontier”

1. Gallay describes the Southeast as a region of “great fluidity.” (6) What did this mean and how did it affect human culture in the region?

2. How did Joseph Bryan make his living?

3. How did Jonathan Bryan adapt to the frontier conditions of South Carolina to make his living?

3. SECTION THREE “Impassioned Disciples”

1. How did Jonathan Bryan attempt to change slaveholding when he became an Evangelical Christian?

2. What was George Whitefield’s relationship to Jonathan Bryan and the legalization of slavery in Georgia?

3. What does Gallay mean by “paternalism” and how did Jonathan Bryan embody it?

4. SECTION FOUR “From One Frontier to Another”

1. When did Bryan decide to move to Georgia? Why did he go?

2. How did stronger colonial governments benefit slaveholders?

5. SECTION FIVE “Land and Politics”

1. In what ways did Bryan obtain his land?

2.Why does Bryan ultimately turn against the British monarchy?

6. SECTION SIX “Politics, 1761-1773”

1. Why does Bryan join the protest movement against Parliament?

2. How did Bryan reach out to men who were of a different economic class?

7. SECTION SEVEN “Dreams of Empire”

1.Why do the Creeks give Bryan land?

8. SECTION EIGHT “The War and After, 1776-1788” 1) What positions did Bryan hold in the revolutionary government of Georgia?

2. Why was Jonathan Bryan successful?




In Jeanette Kieth’s Introduction to her of her book, ” The South, a Concise History, Vol.1.” She sheds light on race, gender and class in the History of America. She speaks on the assumptions of racism and suggest that it may not exist, but we make it exist. Before the times of slavery and white and black.  There were different levels of superiority but it based on wealth, gender and race. However, there are references in her introduction that there were white men beneath a black man because of his wealth. The reference it’s a white man’s world applied to slavery but also applied to  the way white man ruled their homes, acquaintances, etc. It was about the power that white men held at a higher level than other races. Keith believes, that because history and the imperfect way it came about, such as slavery, taking over Indian lands, and  Europeans settling on land that was not thiers; is what brought about racism. I understand the point, but I don’t know if I agree. There is a point that one is aware and unaware of the conditions or circumstances one is about to face. If that condition is understood and agreed upon, whether the result is good or bad , its fair. However, when one does not know, how can the result be measured. I believe racism is taught by all races, not just whites.


One of the country’s founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson, is widely known for valuing a type of liberty associated with not being dependent on others. During this time in history, being truly independent would require one to own enough land to subsist on.

However, large plantation owners grew their properties to scales that no one family could tend to, and required servants. This became a problem that was much like what was happening in the motherland; there were too many people fighting over premium lands. After the indentured servants fulfilled their contractual agreements, they became “free” in our sense of the word, but not in Jefferson’s sense. They had no land and were dependent on others, either as squatters or paid servants or as beggars or criminals.

The problem came to the forefront when Bacon’s Rebellion greatly disturbed the “ruling class” of Virginia. The planters feared they would lose their land, which made them free. They did not want to bring more of these young men across the Atlantic for fear of making them stronger, and exacerbating the problem by adding more people to fight for rich farmland. Their solution was shipping in slaves from Africa, much like other parts of the world had been doing for hundreds of years.


Indians were also subjected to racism. Keith describes how Spanish explorers kidnapped and made slaves of Indians as early as the 1500s. Indians in the south had an established and often structured way of life, but many colonists simply viewed them as “savages” based on their appearance and differences from them.

Lastly, class is the theme that seemed to be the most expounded on in this first section to me. I think the “poor” was also a mistreated and suppressed group. Keith says that African Americans looked down on poor whites, who became known as “trash”.   Rank systems even existed within slavery. Frethorne’s letter to his parents paints a horrific picture of the life of an indentured servant, perhaps the poorest of the poor at that time. Morgan discusses how “landless poor” was a much feared group among government leaders in the colonial south. Ways were developed to extend their servitude because simply releasing them without land or prospects of employment or a way to attain wealth would bring about lawlessness.

All of these themes are very different, but connections can be easily drawn between them. Each of them are a crucial component when examining the colonial south.