Stiven PeterAPUSH: Term Project

American Revolution: Social or Ideological?An Analysis

No event can be said to have fascinated more historians of early America than the

American Revolution. Historians throughout the ages have offered explanations or

models looking at this critical turning point in American history. Yet we can break the

current views into two roughly two camps.

The view espoused by the Progressive and New Left historians is that the social and

economic issues between classes caused the American Revolution. One of these current

historians is Gary B. Nash, professor of history at UCLA. In his essay, The Urban

Crucible: Social Change, Political Consciousness, and the Origins of the American

Revolution, asserts the revolution was a social upheaval where the laboring class

challenged gentry control of public and rules could not be legitimized by customs, laws

or divine will. Nash uses the term class in a broad sense, emphasizing that the colonies

did not have rigid classes, but a broad and diverse range of workers who formed

economic networks for common interest. Specifically he focuses on the state of the

working class in seaport cities like New York, Boston, and Philadelphia. The laboring

class includes people from slaves and indentured servants to merchants and artisans. He

finds that prior to the Revolution, the laboring class saw rapid change, specifically they

became against the concentration of economic, political and cultural authority as the

Revolution approached. The seaport cities then fostered an environment where class-

consciousness could be formed and resentment towards the narrowing of economic

opportunities.

Nash laments that common primary sources like newspapers, municipal records,

business accounts, and published sermons are insufficient since they came form the upper

echelons of society and therefore, ignored the lower rungs of society. Nash turns his

attention to tax lists, poor relief records, wills, mortgages, and wage records. He also

asserts that we can infer lower-class thought from lower-class action, making the project

of determining the nature of this class realization tenable. The Revolution is then seen

through the lens of collective actions where ordinary people in the seaport cities rejected

the idea that rule was legitimized by customs, laws, or divine will. Urban dwellers forced

their way into the political arena. This movement could only be accomplished through

the realization of social classes.

Standing opposite of Nash is T.H Breen, who asserts in his essay, Ideology and

Nationalism on the Eve of the American Revolution: Revisions Once More in Need of

Revision, that the American Revolution is much more political than social. He sets up

four major elements in his theory. The first is the developing military strength of

England. England during the Colonial Era had become a war machine. The crown was

very successful in warfare and knew how to finance large-scale military engagements

without bankrupting the empire or causing widespread internal rebellion. The widespread

presence of tax collectors and bureaucrats made everyone aware of the towering power of

the English war machine. The second element was the rapid development of a consumer

marketplace. Imports and exports between the colonies and England helped cement the

colonies within the context of the greater economy of the empire. Breen quotes Franklin

as he says,” Americans must know, must think, and must care about the country they

chiefly trade with.” The third element is a burgeoning middle class in Great Britain. This

new class is utterly different from Nash in the sense that it developed in Britain and

enjoyed many of the luxuries of the upper echelons in England like buying novels, going

to spas and resort towns, and so on and so forth. English families decreed that the freest

nation was the most prosperous, cementing the hope of many colonists that the colonies

were as free as England. The last and most important element in Breen’s theory is the

development of a strong British nationalism. This consciousness that arose is not one of

class but of the realization of the hegemonic power of Britain. Americans identified with

this nationalism, hailing themselves as Englishmen. The Revolution then, was the result

when the Americans realized that they were not Englishmen to Britain, but second-class

citizens like Scotland. Legislation like the Stamp Act shook previous conception to the

core, the Americans were not Englishmen, but rather, inferior to Britain.

This change in ideology as the Americans as a separate people also had major

repercussions in political ideology. Political though then shifted towards a more Lockean

view of rights where the people have God-given rights independent of existing political

institutions. Breen uses examples like the transcript from a Boston town hall meeting,

where Lockean thought is openly espoused. Quotes from the transcript include: “The

natural Liberty of Man is to be free from any superior Power on Earth, and to be under

the Will of legislative Authority of Man,” and “All Persons born in the British American

Colonies, are by the Laws of GOD and Nature..entitled to all the natural essential,

inherent, and inseparable Rights, Liberties, and Privileges of Subjects born in Great

Britain, or within the Realm.” In short, Americans responded to an aggressive, and

exclusive English state by demanding equality on the basis of natural rights.

It must first be said that this divide between sociology and ideology is not rigid.

It’s obvious to anyone that there were both sociological and ideological changes prior to

the Revolution. The question is which change caused and influenced the Revolution the

more? When looking at the issue in this lens, it becomes clear that Breen’s argument is

superior.

First off, we see that Nash’s argument is a chain that can be modeled as follows:

Development of seaport cities Development of a laboring class and a class-

consciousness In seeing the uneasy concentration of political and economic power in

these cities, the laboring class forced it’s way into the political arena, shattering the habit

of obedience. There are some several discrepancies present in this chain. One of them is

lack of evidence Nash uses. Tax records, wills and other items do not reveal the

realization of class-consciousness. Secondly, Nash’s use of class as a broad and diverse

term gives testament to the nonexistence of rigid class structures and also makes it harder

for Nash to specify the nature of this class realization. Nash also fails to elaborate why

the laboring class refused to tolerate the supposed concentration of political and

economic power. Lastly, Nash’s focus on seaport cities and specially three of those cites,

lends doubt to the idea that this collectivization was a fundamental cause of the

Revolution.

Breen’s hypothesis can be summarized in this chain: Colonists had a strong sense

of British pride and considered themselves as Englishmen When Britain failed to

reciprocate the feelings, the colonists demanded their rights not on the basis of being

Englishmen, but on the Lockean concept of Natural Rights. There are some discrepancies

in this hypothesis since Lockean ideas in the form of political tracts and in instiutions like

the town hall before this identity crisis. However, Breen’s point about the strong

economic relationship between Britain and the Colonists and how the founding fathers

first wanted peace with Britain, lends credence to the idea of an atmosphere of British

nationalism and pride existing prior to the revolution. Furthermore, the preexistence of

Lockean ideas makes the movement from English rights to Natural Rights much more

viable.

For these reasons, there is a preponderance of evidence that sides with Breen

hypothesis of an ideological Revolution instead of a mainly social one. Again the two

need not be strictly divided, but it’s clear that the direct cause of this turning point in

American history, is a change of American identity and political thought.