Colonial Home Life---

Howdy there! I was really excited to spot this for two reasons. One, Non-Fiction is one of my favorite genres and two; colonial America is my business, LOL. Ask around, you'll find that everyone will probably tell you that my favorite era is the 18th Century. That being said be prepared for a lengthy, opinionated response from yours truly.

In a historical sense, although, I'm not sure about the year you are trying to convey, what you have presented is the very basic underlining of colonial life. To keep things simple, we'll just say the essay is geared towards the 18th Century because this is my forte and hopefully you can use the information to strengthen your piece.

Paragraph 1 (not the introduction)

One of the very challenging things about living in the “new” country was building shelters out of the supplies and time they had with the skills they knew. They mostly ended up making small shelters from logs sawed down to represent boards. Then they would make small houses with a big stone fireplace at one end and maybe a loft for children to sleep in above. After a few years, however, they started making bricks in a factory in Massachusetts, so they began to mimic the houses from Holland and England.

Certainly, building homes were a challenge, and you are correct in pointing out most dwellings were wood-based or even brick but this paragraph alone is very vague. For example, you mention the Colonists used stone fireplaces but you neglect the cooking aspect. How Colonists cooked in the fireplace were pretty unique actually. Often, inside, there was a long metal "bar" welded into a hook at the end. This hook could support teapots, pots in general, and even a spot to hang clothing to try (depending how responsible the individual was – can you say, "My clothes were caught on fire?!") Usually the hooked-like bars were thick but occasionally a socket bayonet was welded and bent into a J-hook for the same purpose. The usage of the bayonets however were seen used more in the "rebel" Army - Washington's Army - rather than at home. Also depending on the person's social standing, many colonial homes had several fireplaces. Revere's house (the original foundation is still standing in Boston), had at least four, and probably more before the third level of his home was torn down something in the early 1800's. Jefferson's Monticello had several fireplaces scattered throughout his mansion. So, my point is the Colonists usually had many because without fire – well, good luck! Also, many of the "well-to-do" families were the ones that had the assortment of fireplaces but the poorer class might only have had one, two at most.

Where it says, "After a few years…" how many years exactly? Two? Three? Five? Try and be more descriptive. Your efforts will reward you, trust me. Also, where exactly in Massachusetts did factories start producing bricks? Was it Boston? Perhaps Roxbury? How about Middlesex? Tell us where in MA, and maybe describe briefly how that town functioned. For instance, in the 1700's, Middlesex comprised of farmers. Now, as for description, what did the homes look like in England and Holland? And why did the Colonists feel it was necessary to mimic other country's homes? What was the purpose?

Heat was a constant problem. With no matches, they had to use flint and steel, a half- hour process. Since the very lighting of a fire was so time-consuming... Very time-consuming on a freezing January morning, they banked down the fire every evening and started it up again in the morning. Sometimes, however, the fire would go out, and no and no amount of fuel and blowing could re-light it, so they sent a child over to a neighbors with a fire-scoop, to barrow a few hot coals, to easily re-start their fire.

Yes, heat was an awful burden in the winter months, especially in the Northern colonies but there's a few things here that I feel the need to point out. For starters, some families were so poor they couldn't afford coal to even start a fire! How awful is that? Many people in colonial America were subjected to freezing to death because of the lack of funds to purchase coal. It probably wasn't uncommon to see children piled in a single bed just so they could share the extra body heat, while they slept under animal skins or some means of warmth.

Second, are you absolutely sure children were sent in the freezing cold to use someone else's coal? If so, a boy would be sent, not a woman because it was a "man's job" to support the family whereas the woman were the lower class and their one, true purpose was to cook. So, you might want to mention a lad or boy was sent to the neighboring families. Also, the reason I question that a child would be sent rather than an older man is, children were susceptible to disease and ultimately death more than the adult. I know, because I've seen hundreds of headstones of children usually not living past twenty. Most died around the ages of three to fourteen. If you want as a learning tool, I have many pictures of headstones from colonial times. Walking through cemeteries has become a growing hobby of mine, and you really do learn quite a bit how a person felt, thought, and how devoted to family they were. We Americans suck today in that respect! We totally take life for granted, LOL! Just send me a PM and I'll pick a few pictures out for you.

And lastly with this paragraph, a very important fact is being neglected. True, staying warm was a trifle but whether you are aware of it or not, many wooden houses were actually burned. One example is while the families were asleep, if the fire was still going, it wasn't uncommon to have someone's home burned down, even while they were still asleep. Sometimes if the family had a pet, a dog, the animal could have knocked a log out into open where it could "feed" on other objects such as the floor, chairs, bookcases, etc. Lovely, ain't it? Another tragedy that probably wasn't as common unless the foundation of the house was centered in the middle of forest was that families were subjected to suffocation while the fire was lit. If a heavy branch fell, blocking the path for smoke to escape through the chimney, it just backfilled into the room. So, if you were asleep? And you never awoke?

Making candles was a long and messy process…

How long, and why was it messy specifically?

When people think of colonial food, they think of corn mush, twenty-four seven. But really, peoples, don’t feel sorry for your ancestor’s diets. They had recipes that sound delicious to us, even now.

This is a good example of lack of research, or at least not enough. The first sentence is only your opinion, but historically it has not truth because when I think about colonial food now, I cringe… I instantly think of uncooked or properly unprepared food, thus no wonder 90% of the Colonists lived to a ripe age of only sixty, besides disease. Some of the poorer families couldn't afford ice to keep their meats from spoiling, and if ice was unavailable, I imagine that they attempt to keep the food fresh by storing them in a cellar hole – away from moisture, and wrapped tight to prevent flies, maggots or other lovely creatures from infesting it.

True, the Colonies adored their "sweets," lol, and the recipe is intriguing, but where did you find it and who specifically is Sussannah Carter? What role did she play in colonial America? Was this her recipe; did I read that correctly?

Also, because it's making me twitch, you do not need "twenty-four seven" or "peoples" in those sentences. Those words clutter the sentences horribly and your essay now has a bit less creditability. If this is an essay for school, your goal should be to sounds as precise, and professional as possible.

Maybe something along the lines of:

When we imagine (or "contemplate" – extra brownie points for you – your teacher will be impressed, lol), colonial food we might think of uncooked meats that spoiled and led to disease. However, this is not the case. Our ancestors, who settled from Ireland, Scotland, Germany, France and England; they had a plethora of recipes from the "Old World" and willingly shared them with relatives or with friends from neighboring areas.

See how much better that sounds? With this brief example that I thought off the top of my head, the reader learns a little about the different nationalities settling in the colonies (and England was not the only one but certainly the majority of the Colonists referred themselves as Englishman even if they were born in "America."), that uncooked food led to disease and a more concise way of displaying the different nationalities all had splendid recipes.

because, even with no ships, no way to get food, they could always depend on having corn and squash and pumpkins, because they grew well in the New England soil.

Mmm… Not quite, sorry to say. Ships were the very support system of all the colonies. The cargo on them could have had some delicacies such as tea, wine, tobacco, indigo either coming from the East Indies, France, or the mother country itself – England. Ships also carried food, and this was especially true during the American Revolution when Washington's troops were starving to death. In general, major ports where ships traveled in an out such as Boston Harbor or Lake Champlain; they were absolutely crucial in colonial America, and not just for pleasure purposes but ships were also the telegrams. I suggest rewording, and be careful when mentioning "no ships" because they were everywhere, especially in the Northern colonies.

Second, may I ask how are families going to survive in the winter with just corn and pumpkin? After a period of time, they will spoil too, unfortunately. Many of our ancestors, long before the 17th and 18th Century, learned about a wonderful word known as rationing. I don't know for sure, as this is just speculation on my part, but I would imagine during harvesting, most of the crops would be carefully situated in a cellar hole or in area of the home where moisture couldn't easily get to the food. I would also imagine extra, special care would have been taken to make sure the food is covered and tightly packed to prevent spoiling. Also, a good portion of the "rough neck" Colonists; the ones that weren't wealthy but used to adversity, would probably have hunted also with their muskets in search of obscure North American game that do not hibernate such as deer or certain species of fowl.

Growing up in colonial times was very different then it is today. For one thing, children were given absolutely no social standing.

This is NOT true at all. Children were given extreamly strict upbringings, especially when religion was involved. About 80% or so of the Colonists who were British stock were Christians but a few examples of records that I've read concerning upbringing of children were as follows:

1. Never speak unless spoken too.
2. Always keep eye contact with your superior.
3. Blasphemy is forbidden and punishments* were/or could or could be given


I'd say more than half, if not more, of the "well-to-do" families had high hopes for their sons and a good portion went to Harvard College around the ages of twelve or perhaps a few years older. In Boston, some of the Colonists not only enrolled in Harvard but also in the Boston Latin School. Samuel Adams is one such person. He enrolled in both of the prestigious school systems.

Another very different thought was that children were born evil and had to be shaped, body and soul by their parents. Girls especially were forced to live in very uncomfortable fashions.

Both of these sentences are false, to my knowledge as well. I have never read any records claiming the parents though their children were "evil." If anything, the parents in colonial America were accustomed to deaths of children, and if one died; sure it was sad but it was uncommon to see some families mourn very little but attempt to have another child soon to replace the other. But certainly no family to my knowledge ever saw the child as "evil" from birth.

Not all girls were crammed in small, unfit quarters. Again, the wealthy lived in high means and a daughter of merchant for example probably had an outstanding life that compared to a girl hailing from a farmer in the "backcountry" of the Deep South. I suggest doing some more research and take an account for both the wealthy and the poor side because the two factions lived very differently. Most of your essay is setup that way, neglecting to properly portray the two parties.

*Colonial punishments –
http://history.org/Foundation/journal/s ... branks.cfm

This article is well written and explains in depth about colonial punishments. There's more that meets the eye in colonial life.

The other piece of advice that I could offer is describe disease, as I mentioned it several times. The Common Cold wiped out thousands. Small Pox and Measles were also deadly killers. There were many more epidemics that were as equally as deadly – research! - Lice were another issue too such as infections also. A simple cut could have led to an outragious emergancy. They did not have Penicilliin or any antibiotics except alcohol. And depending on the person, I would imagine the lazier folk but have not disinfected their wound nor wrapped it, thus major issues later on. People just didn't realize the dangers of simple things like a little cut to the thumb. Freak accidents such as farms were common too. My great, great second uncle was killed in a haying accident in the early part of the 20th Century. A doctor game, and declared he was fine. The following day or night my uncle died due to internal bleeding. This brings up another point. Medicine two hundred years ago was pretty vague, and a good part I'd say, was just guessing when administering treatment to a patient. With new epidemics plaguing the colonies, Physicians even kept a safe distance and probably refused to treat a patient that had "the Pox" in fear for his own life.

Anyway, there's a brief recap of colonial life. What is written is mostly factual but there's a whole more that should be mentioned. As for me, I've been reading about colonial life, especially in the 18th Century for little over a year but I've had an interest with it since I was very young. I do a lot of cross-referencing, and talk to various people that are far more knowledgeable than me.

As for the piece on the whole, there are many grammar errors. Of course, I'll let you sort through and edit yourself – that's the best way to improve, learning to edit by yourself, and ultimately strengthens your writing. If however, you're not sure what needs to be grammatically correct, feel free to me PM me.

Also, any questions concerning colonial life, I probably can assist you.

Best of luck! I look forward to reading any changes you make or add on to the piece!!

Unless your teacher said specifically to put into your introduction why you chose your topic, ditch it. That is a bad way to start an essay.

It looked like you reasearched everything well enough. There are some typos, so you'll want to fix those up.

The recipe should probably be in italics.

three sources of sugar were honey, maple syrup, and sugar, which came in beehive shaped loaves, sent from England.

Do you mean that the sugar came in loaves? Otherwise this would probably be sugar cane.

You have no conclusion. You should not end an essay where you feel like no longer talking anymore. You should restate your main points, preferably those that should be introduced in the introduction. Look up essay format on websites. At your level, you should be learning about it in school.

Hope this helps.