Virginia Colony Vs Massachusetts Bay Colony Essay

The Virginia Colony and the Massachusetts Bay Colony were not meritocracies. The definition of meritocracy is an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class privilege or wealth. This system of meritocracy only existed for an elite few in the colonies of Virginia and the Massachusetts Bay, those that were white, wealthy males. While the colonies had slightly different ways of going about it, they each had ways they prevented the people in the lower class from being successful. The Virginia Colony and the Massachusetts Bay Colony were run by landowning men who were elected by fellow landowners, who used business tactics and religious beliefs to continue to exclusively benefit people who had the same …show more content…
In 1618 the Virginia Company instituted the headright system that allotted 50 acres of land to anyone who paid their way over, in addition to 50 more acres for every person they brought to the colony. The headright system did not help the Virginia Colony develop a meritocracy because it only gave people who were rich the opportunity to receive land. People who had land could vote . If one did not own any land one essentially did not have a say in important decisions for the colony. Virgnia did not help it’s attempt to be more like a metricoracy when the colony formed the House of Burgesses, the first legestative assembly in America which met in 1619. During this time the elected leaders made policys. Since the house was not dieverse in the status of those elected the policys made were not always favorable for everyone in the colony. In the case of the Massachusetts Bay Colony which was established in 1630, the roles of the colony were also decided by men who had land and were regular members of the Puritan Church. Similialy to the Virgnia Colony, Massachusetts Bay also had issues with diversity in their