Changes in the Land: Chapter 2 Summary & Analysis

The landscape that European settlers encountered was different from Europe, but it took a long time for the settlers to properly understand this difference. The first who arrived did not see much of the new land, as they did not travel inland from the coast. As time went on, settlers tended to focus on aspects of the landscape that could be sent back to Europe and sold for money, such fur and timber. Many of those who travelled to the area described features of the natural world using the terms “profits” and “commodities.” “Profits” were abundant, as there were many natural resources in America that were limited or unavailable back in Europe.

During the early period of colonization, it was not yet technologically possible to transport certain goods, such as firewood, back to Europe. Nonetheless, the “scarcity value” of goods like firewood encouraged settlers to view them as objects of potential profit anyway. In this sense, the way that settlers viewed the American landscape was inescapably shaped by their memories of Europe. Understanding the natural landscape as a set of “commodities” also meant that settlers viewed facets of this landscape as “isolated and extractable units,” rather than parts of an interdependent system. As such, Europeans had a poor understanding of “ecological relationships.”

At the same time, there were differences in how settlers perceived New England’s natural resources and how European visitors did. Those who were building a new life for themselves in America were more invested in altering the landscape to suit their lifestyle. Overall, Europeans’ view of the American landscape was significantly distorted by their particular assumptions and desires. Yet their perception that New England was filled with an abundance of natural resources was correct. They left breathless descriptions of the number and variety of fish in New England’s coastal waters. They were also astonished by the abundance of birds such as geese, ducks, and wild turkeys. The most common bird by far was the passenger pigeon.

Colonizers were also impressed by the animals in New England. These included bears, deer, wolves, foxes, beavers, otters, martens, wildcats, and moose. They were also surprised by the lack of certain species that were common in Europe, as well as an absence of domesticated animals such as horses, sheep, goats, pigs, cats, cattle, dogs, and rats. Many of the microorganisms that caused disease in Europe were also absent and colonizers remarked on the relative lack of death from disease among their communities compared to those back home in Europe.

Settlers also noted the richness of the forests and were delighted by the abundance of timber. However, just because the woods were thick does not mean they were messy and “impenetrable.” There were many clearings and some areas, such as what is currently Boston, were “nearly barren.” Colonizers soon noticed that northern New England had thicker forests and colder weather than the southern part of the region; they did not think of the area as a monolith. Ecologists used to call the southern area, which includes Connecticut, Rhode Island, and parts of Massachusetts, the “oak-chestnut region” after the trees that grew there. The northern part, which includes most of Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, was defined by its “northern hardwoods.” The central section contained a mix of these two types of trees. 

However, this kind of classification is not necessarily that useful, as in reality the precolonial forests of New England contained a “mosaic” of different kinds of trees. In a given region there might be clusters of different forests sitting next to each other in a “complex patchwork.”  There was also a diversity of soil in the region; this variation, as well as the soil’s fertility, played an important role in determining the hospitability of an area for settlement. The region also contained streams, swamps, and what the colonizers called “quaking bogs,” where the wet ground shook underneath a person’s feet.

In contrast, other areas had dry soil, such as much of Cape Cod, which has a milder and drier climate than anywhere else in New England. However, the region was not seen as a desirable location for settlement, and those who did eventually choose to live there faced “special problems.” Across New England, forest fires were very common—both those started by humans and those that occurred naturally. Europeans were especially astonished by the tall forests of white pine, which was perfect for making ships. However, in their excitement the colonizers mistakenly assumed that there was an “infinite store” of these trees when in fact their number was rather limited. 

Other parts of the New England landscape contained abundant resources, including the oyster banks of Massachusetts Bay and the waterfowl that gathered in the salt marshes of the same area. Cronon reemphasizes that precolonial New England was a diverse “patchwork” that had been shaped by complex historical processes. Around 12,500 years ago, New England was a “glacial tundra,” but over the time the landscape dramatically transformed into the forested area that exists today. During this period, the landscape was constantly shifting, and not merely in a “cyclical” way.

Both indigenous and European inhabitants of the landscape contributed to this history of change, imposing order on the natural world. By the time European colonizers arrived, Native people had already been living in New England for 10,000 years. The Europeans were baffled by the Native peoples’ way of life, which they saw as pointlessly impoverished in a land defined by abundant resources.