Friday, February 6, 2009

Nehemias Americanus and Biographical Parallel

In reading the writing on Winthrop, I noticed several things happening, which were confirmed when I read the Manierre piece after. First was the way Winthrop seemed to be portrayed in much the same manner Odysseus is in the Odyssey. There are tales of his good deeds, of how he seems to be above the other men of his time. While Odysseus was seen as making many mistakes, Winthrop doesn't seem to fall prey as easily to vanity as Odysseus. This is because it is not physical acts that are esteemed by the Puritans, but rather acts of piousness and good will, the traits that all good people should have in their pursuit of living like the Bible says they should. The piece also spoke a lot about what the Puritans held as important in society. Winthrop is a good man, who was able to make a reasonable separation of church and state, and a man who uses good judgement and reason in all instances, never being induced to make exceptions for the rich or influential. I really began to think that it would have been easy to blame the hard times on him as their leader, and there were many hard times in the early settlement years. He could have been a scapegoat for the woes of the community, but instead he was elected more than ten times by the people. This is truly a testament to his character and the fact that he lived the life held in highest regard by the Puritans.

Manierre's piece showed me a little more how the Puritan literary tradition worked. I saw the comparisons in the way Winthrop was compared to classical heroes and biblical heroes, but Manierre really showed me why he did it. The drawing of biographical parallels is quite brilliant, especially when it is to give the glory to God for creating such a great person in the new chosen people of God. This covenant is very important to the Puritans, and Mather seems to pay great homage to God with his writings. This is especially true considering how well read he is and the great number of allusions he can make and the quantity of works he has as his tools. What I found to be most important is how he drew complete biographical parallels, not simply pulling a few anecdotes from a life and comparing it favorably. This could be done with nearly anyone, but to show an entire life lived well and justly is much more convincing and gives even more evidence to the idea of holding the covenant with God.

2 comments:

  1. I agree, John winthrop did seem to be greatly above the other men of his times with his wisdom and morals. He was a hypocrite in no way and practiced his beliefs honestly. He felt that God was on his side, and because of this he felt he could preserver through those going against him. He was a great teacher of his beliefs and believed strongly in moderation. It had seemed that many thought he was too good, earning him enemies. And it was these enemies that attacked him with false accusations which only lead more people to trust in him. A great leader he was.

    ReplyDelete
  2. These “acts of piousness and goodwill” are indeed traits that the Puritans took in high esteem, and in John Winthrop, Mather found an “example of virtuous behavior drawn from the lives of saintly men,”(155). Mather does this with extreme skill in his Magnalia Christi Americana when describing Winthrop’s parables (offering wood to a man in winter to prevent him from stealing). He is a source of strength, hope, and charity to the people of the New World, along with being humble and courteous to his peers. In his time, John Winthrop may have done all the noble and selfless acts we read about in Magnalia (though with some embelishment, for sure), but there is not doubt that he was a great leader.

    ReplyDelete