Demos, John, A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony, Oxford University Press, Inc.

, New York, New York. Over extensive periods of time, various historical events experience the development of manufactured misconceptions and assumptions that tend to replace the actual documented events that occurred at the time. American history alone possesses quite a few of these developed (and inaccurate) misconceptions, including the origins of Thanksgiving, the material of George Washingtons false teeth, and the role of the Emancipation Proclamation in freeing the slaves. These misconceptions, after long periods of existence, gradually become accepted as fact, and the truth fades into obscurity. In A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony, John Demos aims to evaluate conceptions that have been made regarding the Puritan colonists in Plymouth Colony, and to determine the accuracy of said conceptions. More specifically, Demos observes the role of religion and repression in particular aspects of life in Plymouth. A common claim regarding the Plymouth Colony is that people were repressed by their religious beliefs, and were denied any sense of leisure and pleasure in their development and life. In addition, a frequent belief held by many individuals today was that women in the Plymouth Colony (and on the planet as a whole during the seventeenth century) were heavily repressed in society and completely submissive to the male population. Demos investigates these beliefs, and discovers that these popularly held ideas may not be entirely factual, thus exhuming the potential truth behind more misconceptions in history. In A Little Commonwealth, Demos aims to further inform the reader about the standard of living in the Plymouth Colony while refuting popular misconceptions regarding the lives of the colonists. Demos analyzes specific aspects of colonial life such as married couples, possessions, and the recreational development of individuals in the colony. 1

One of the more widely accepted ideas of the time period surrounding the Plymouth Colony was the idea that women possessed next to no rights and were at the mercy of the male population for functionality and survival. While Demos certainly concedes that women were not entirely of equal stature to men in the Plymouth Colony, he does suggest that the women in Plymouth were not as dependent on men as women in other regions of the world. Demos primarily focuses on the duties of the Plymouth husband and wife, emphasizing that the wife often had a considerable amount of clout in the family household. Regarding the importance of the wife in the Plymouth Colony, Demos writes that in certain most important areas of family life-the sale of real property or the disposition of children-the couple would make decisions together (181). This statement represents a definitive declaration by Demos that women were not merely objects for reproduction, and that women were crucial in the decision making process within the family household. Demos also provides instances in the history of the Plymouth Colony where the decision and consideration of the wife played an important part in the outcome of the situation. For instance, Demos cites an instance where the initial preference of the wife played a significant role in whether or not a particular child was adopted into the family. Addressing the situation, Demos claims that the wife finally agreed is less important here than the way in which her initial reluctance sufficed to block the childs adoption, in spite of the clear wishes of her husband (89). This particular situation surely indicates that a womans opinion was not always disregarded in the Plymouth Colony, and that the authority of the colony recognized the importance of equilibrium in the family structure. In addition to proclaiming the rights of the wife in the Plymouth Colony, Demos also mentions the rights and abilities of the widows of the colony. One right in particular that Demos focuses on is the widows right to onethird of the land and profit from her deceased husband. While this practice was customary in

other regions as well, Demos emphasizes the efforts of the courts in Plymouth to ensure that the widow received a fair share. Demos presents evidence to this claim, accounting that Occasionally the court saw fit to alter the terms of a will on this account. In 1663, for example, it awarded to widow Naomi Silvester a larger share of her late husbands estate than the inconsiderable pte he had left her (85). This example illustrates Demos argument in exemplary fashion, indicating that the court system of the Plymouth Colony trusted the duties of the woman in the family unit, and wanted to ensure that the woman received what she rightfully deserved after losing her husband, regardless of what the husband had left her. While women were not equal in rights and privileges, Demos offers a strong argument that the idea that women possessed no clout at all is not entirely accurate, and that women possessed considerable opinion regarding a few issues in daily life. Demos also aims to settle the misconceptions regarding possessions and wealth within the Plymouth colony. Beginning his chapter on furnishings, Demos states that the temptation is strong to think of seventeenth-century communities as broadly homogenous and undifferentiated (36). Demos subsequently describes various different aspects of wealth in Plymouth, explicitly stating that the colonists sought to increase their wealth rather than live in a community where all locales and possessions were close to identical. One of the prime examples of wealth stated by Demos is the possession of fine clothing. Citing the immense wardrobe of Plymouth governor William Bradford, Demos states that Clothes, like household furnishings, represented money in the bank; hence many of the wealthier people accumulated them in extremely large quantities (53). This statement clearly supports the statement made by Demos that many citizens of the Plymouth colony did not desire complete uniformity, and that the acquisition and representation of wealth was certainly desirable among many colonists. As the previous quote indicates, home 3

furnishings were also a symbol of wealth in Plymouth Colony, and colonists pursued furnishings to distinguish them as high class. Demos makes a note of such pursuits in his chapter devoted to furnishings in Plymouth, stating that in short, the whole community moved slowly toward greater material prosperity (37). This notes that while many colonists initiated their life in the colony on relatively equal financial terms, the goal of many colonists was to advance in wealth and social standing, viewing a plethora of possessions as a strong indicator of social success. One other aspect of material wealth, cites Demos, is the fact that a monetary system was not frequently circulating: there was relatively little money circulating in the Old Colony, and there certainly were no banks in which to deposit savings. Thus wealth implied some tangible kind of investment (38). This fact solidifies the idea that possessions were the key factor of wealth in Plymouth, and that colonists were not accumulating wealth through currency, but rather through their ownership of objects. Demos also attempts to illustrate the idea that life in the Plymouth Colony was not as religiously repressive as previously believed, and that there was considerable exposure to recreational activities and leisure in the colony rather than unrelenting work. One misconception that Demos immediately attempts to refute is the idea that family households possessed many members of several generations. Demos cites the average house size as a strong contradiction to this misconception, saying our survey of Old Colony architecture surely implies some limits on the size of individual families: it is difficult to picture really large numbers of people managing to live together in such relatively modest houses (63). This claim certainly indicates that families divided themselves into different homes, as one home could not house a large family unit. Furthermore, Demos targets misconceptions regarding sexual repression in the colony, bringing up instances of apologies issued by the court regarding sexual rumors and claiming that 4

it becomes difficult to sustain the traditional picture of seventeenth-century New England as being extremely strait-laced and repressive in anything pertaining to sex (153). While Demos admits that these records are not in plentiful supply, he does make the case that the existence of such evidence refutes the idea of complete sexual repression in Plymouth. Demos also indicates that the colony was not overly repressive in regard to liquor as well. Demos note that the court occasionally granted liquor licenses directly to women (90) shows a relaxed viewpoint held by the court regarding the use of liquor, granted it was not a disruption to the colony. Using the best evidence he could discover, Demos aims to convince the reader that repression was present, but not as extreme as commonly believed. In terms of collecting data and information and formulating an informative work regarding life in Plymouth Colony, Demos does a spectacular job. Demos manages to cover many different aspects of Plymouth life, ranging from the life of a colonist, their possessions and residencies, and the governmental and social system that determined their lives. Such an analysis enriches the reader with added perspectives and understanding of how life functioned in Plymouth. However, while Demos does provide evidence to justify his central argument, his evidence lacks clear definition and consistency at times. For instance, while Demos brings up individual court records and wills, this does not establish that such decisions were consistent. One example would be the instance of the colonial wife impacting the decision for an adoption to be made; while the court records factor in the wishes of the wife, this may not have been the usual procedure. The lack of consistent evidence may be an indication of Demos favorability toward Plymouth Colony, and an attempt to reduce the stigmas that we now associate with the time period. Essentially, while Demos succeeds in proving that Plymouth Colony was not as

repressive as popularly conceived at times, he often lacks the evidence to firmly establish the idea that the colony reduced its repression at all times. In addition to Demos argument not quite rounding up entirely around, Demos also makes a few generalizations regarding popular misconceptions, assuming that such misconceptions exist without providing definitive evidence. For instance, Demos states in the chapter on membership that recent studies of colonial family life have sought to clear away some serious misconceptions about the size and membership of the typical household (62). What is disappointing about this statement is that Demos does nothing to establish the existence of such a misconception, forcing the reader to merely assume that the misconception is popularly held. This issue threatens the authenticity of the book, as a considerable number of readers may not have sided with the misconceptions stated by Demos, thus nullifying that aspect of the argument. Despite this troubling criticism, A Little Commonwealth does an excellent job describing life in Plymouth Colony, as the book works feverishly to exhaust much information about the colony.