The Royal Charter of 1662

Predictions:

I hope to learn more about the history of the Charter and what it consisted of.

I wish to be informed about the people involved in the creation of the Charter and the importance of these people in comparison to the whole of Connecticut.

I wonder why the “Charter Oak” is considered a Connecticut landmark?

I wonder if there are any other prominant landmarks located in this exhibit?

During my visit to the Museum of Connecticut History, I focused on learning about The Charter Oak, which played an integral role in the formation of Connecticut’s government and identity. The Connecticut General Court had to take action in regards to the legal status of the colony after King Charles II restored the English monarchy in 1660. The document called, the Fundamental Orders had never been approved by England because it left out all reference to the English crown. The colony sent John Winthrop, Jr. to travel to England in order to negotiate the King to petition a Charter for Connecticut during May of 1661. Charles II finally approved the document a year later and even though the Royal Charter of 1662 completely replaced the Fundamental Orders, it still preserved the rights to self-governement. The Charter renamed the General Court to the General Assembly and increased the magistrates from six to twelve. Connecticut’s boundaries were also established from the Charter. The Royal Charter of 1662 was cherished and protected by the citizens as they beleived it clearly represented the constitutional liberties. When the Royal Governor, Sir Edmund Andros, was ordered to take back this Charter, Connecticut refused and hid the document in the famous Charter Oak. In 1693, adjoined Connecticut to New York and the Charter was again threatened. Fitz-John Winthrop was then sent to England in order to receive formal approval of the Charter from William II. After 1776, the General Assembly revised the document in removing all relations to the English crown.

The Charter Oak tree where the important document was hidden during the fight for Connecticut’s independence, symbolizes a sense of memory because the people of Connecticut may not remember what the Charter states, but they will remember the story behind it. Connecticut’s identity is established through the process of creating this document because since it is known as “the Constitution State,” government is a huge part of Connecticut as a whole. The result of this Charter was to maintain the rights to self-government and ultimately gain complete freedom without any connection or ties to England. The Charter itself symbolizes Connecticut’s beleifs and claims the importance of liberty, especially constitutional liberties. People’s relationships with the government and democracy in Connecticut first started with the creation of this document because it was the start of the states’ battle with becoming independent. This Charter clearly changed a few things and standards in the government, but ultimately helped shape the values regarding politics in Connectcut today. The indentity of the state was obviously challenged as they could have receded to the power of England instead of fighting to become an independent colony, but Connecticut showed their toughness and persevered as a whole. This event in history defines the identity of Connecticut as a group of people working together and persevering to fight for their rights and freedoms. The Royal Charter Oak of 1662 allowed the state of Connecticut to discover it’s identity, determine it’s ideals, and establish itself as a strong and confident leader in regards to government and politics.

 

The Stanley Whitman House

The Stanley Whitman House, built sometime between 1709 and 1720, is located in Farmington, Connecticut and represents colonial America in Connecticut. This specific house was turned into a “living history center” in order to teach visitors of all ages about the colonial life by engaging them in the ideas that formed the groundwork of the culture. The house focuses on “the day in the life” of two very different families. The Smiths’ are located on the South side of the building, while the Whitmans’ are located on the North side showing the immensity of the house itself. This house is intended to change the perspective of anyone who visits to prove that although these families were well educated and financially above average, they still lived extremely difficult lives filled with multiple jobs and responsibilities.

The Stanley Whitman House definitely, maybe unintentionally, represents American identity and presents a few different American values. Focusing on class and economics, this house was home to two well-educated and economically comfortable families. Knowing this information, it may seem as though these families lived comfortable and “easy” lives, but in addition to being farmers, the men in the house had other jobs such as a weaver, arbitrator, justice of the peace, probate judge, town clerk, and shoemaker. This represents American identity because although both the families were considered as “wealthy,” they still had to work incredibly hard to maintain their financial stability. Considering that the other jobs were only held by men, the house unintentionally makes a connection to gender as woman during this time period were not able to uphold any other job that doesn’t include farming or housework. This house represents how gender determined the opportunities that you had during this time period. The American values I noticed in this site were opportunity, unity, and determination. Opportunity was represented through the learning of the many job choices the men had to choose from and the amount of money that was available for these families to make through farming and other jobs. Education also led to many more opportunities. Unity was represented through the American colonies being created during this time period as well as the determination for these American families to be successful. I would like to learn about the other families that lived in this house and I wonder why these two families were chosen to focus on. Another question I raised while visiting this site was: did these economically comfortable families have slaves working on the farms?

http://www.stanleywhitman.org/