Book
review:
Morgan,
Edmund S. The Birth of the Republic,
1763-89. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1977.
I like Morgan’s book. I
re-learned some stuff I knew about the era of the Revolution, and learned a lot
that I didn't know. He tells a coherent story; the links between events are
made clear, as are the contexts in both America and in Great Britain.
I wish there were books of this
caliber about the Roman Empire, China, the Middle Ages, Egypt, the fertile
Crescent….
I will say that Morgan’s prose
is exuberant, perhaps he exaggerates intentionally to add color to his
chronology, perhaps he’s a bit sloppy in hyping his romance with the American
Revolutionary story.
There is a significant flaw in The Birth of the Republic. Morgan practically says that the rebellious
colonists discovered the principal of human equality. Throughout the book he
confuses “rights” with equality, and confuses “liberty” with “equality.” In
fact, he allows himself to splurge with “Gunpowder is a great equalizer,” and
actually says (p. 79) “The Revolution became a people’s war” ! Gee whiz….
Great Britain did not think the
war was about equality. The King and parliament notably thought it was about
getting the colonies to help pay for the expenses of garrisoning North America
and prosecuting the Seven Years’ War.
There was less unity and
singleness of purpose than Morgan describes. Neither the Revolutionary zealots
nor the members of the Continental Congresses referred to themselves as
"the founding fathers," and there never was political or
philosophical unity among these men or among the colonies. There was a strong
ideological consensus about bolstering and preserving the security of property,
and of course there were economic motives that helped push the colonies into rebellion.
The Founding Fathers were
generally wealthy, professional men or political leaders. Ultimately they were
all politicians. There was sharp and prolonged disagreement among them on many
issues. In fact, many delegates to the 1st and 2nd
Continental Congresses were opposed to independence. (About 20% of colonial
Americans were British loyalists).
I dispute Morgan's central
theme. He argues that the concept of human equality was a central driving force
in the Revolution and the creation of the constitution. I think he fails to
make the case, and his preoccupation with equality mars the utility of his
analysis.
No comments:
Post a Comment