American Revolutions: A Continental History, 1750-1804

“In 1775, Benjamin Franklin recalled, ‘I never had heard in any Conversation from any Person drunk or sober, the least Expression of a Wish for a Separation, or Hint that such a Thing would be advantageous to America.’”

This reflection from Benjamin Franklin reveals the initial reluctance among colonists toward the idea of independence from Britain. It provides historical context to the complexity of American identity formation, suggesting that the desire for independence was not inherent or unanimous but developed in response to escalating tensions and injustices. The quote underscores the revolution’s contingent nature, challenging narratives that portray it as an inevitable culmination of colonial discontent.

“‘It is truly a miserable thing that we no sooner leave fighting our neighbors, the French, but we must fall to quarrelling among ourselves.’—Reverend Samuel Johnson of Connecticut, 1763.”

This quote, which opens the discussion on colonial attitudes and the aftermath of conflict with the French, encapsulates the perennial cycle of conflict and internal discord. It highlights a significant shift from external to internal conflicts, suggesting that peace with external enemies often leads to introspection and internal strife. Johnson’s observation underscores the fragile unity among the colonies, which is strained further under the pressures of governance and ideological differences following the cessation of a common external threat.

“What did Britain gain by the most glorious and successful war on which she ever engaged? A height of Glory which excited the Envy of the surrounding nations and […] an extent of empire we were equally unable to maintain, defend or govern.”

This reflection captures the paradox of imperial victory: the acquisition of an extensive empire and the admiration of other nations, juxtaposed with the incapacity to effectively manage, defend, or govern such a vast territory. It points to the inherent challenges of overextension and the burdens that come with great power, foreshadowing the difficulties Britain would face in maintaining control over its American colonies. This quote embodies the bittersweet nature of imperial triumphs, which often sow the seeds of future conflicts and governance dilemmas.

“The British conquest of New France alarmed native peoples, who lost the leverage of playing off one empire against another.”

This quote reflects a critical shift in the power dynamics of North America following the British victory over France. Indigenous tribes had previously benefited from European rivalries, leveraging their strategic alliances with either France or Britain for their own advantage. The consolidation of power under the British removed this leverage, leaving Indigenous Americans in a more vulnerable position. The quote speaks to the complex interplay of colonial powers in North America and the Indigenous strategies of resistance and adaptation in response to the ever-changing landscape of European colonization. It underscores the loss of diplomatic autonomy for Indigenous peoples and foreshadows the challenges they would face in directly confronting British colonial expansion.

“During the spring and summer of 1763, far-flung native peoples surprised and captured most of the British forts around the Great Lakes and in the Ohio Valley, killing or capturing the soldiers.”

This quote underscores the determination and capability of Indigenous American tribes to resist European encroachment on their lands. The strategic surprise attacks on British forts highlight not only the military prowess of the Indigenous peoples but also their deep discontent with foreign occupation and the treaties that often disregarded their rights and sovereignty. The successful captures of these forts symbolize a significant, albeit temporary, reclamation of power and autonomy by Indigenous Americans in the face of colonial expansion, emphasizing the ongoing conflict between Indigenous populations and European settlers over land, resources, and cultural dominance.

“The fear assumed a special salience because so many colonists owned enslaved people of African origins or descent. Washington insisted that the British meant to ‘make us as tame & abject Slaves as the Blacks we Rule over with such arbitrary Sway.’ In 1765, John Adams denounced the British and declared: ‘We won’t be their negroes.’ Living among growing numbers of slaves, masters could see the dreadful consequences of losing freedom.”

This quote reveals the relationship between the colonists’ fight for liberty and their own practices of enslavement. The ironic juxtaposition of the colonists’ fears of becoming “as tame & abject Slaves” as those they enslaved underscores a cognitive dissonance. Adams’s and Washington’s comments reflect a self-centered view of liberty, exclusive to their social class and race, highlighting the era’s pervasive racial hierarchies. The comparison unwittingly underscores the inherent contradiction in the colonists’ simultaneous fight for their own freedom and their subjugation of others, laying bare the selective application of the principles of liberty and justice in colonial America.

“Phillis Wheatley, won celebrity in Britain for her pious poetry […] Purchased by a tailor, Wheatley recovered, learned to read, and published poetry that extolled liberty and evangelical Christianity. Impressed by her talent, an English critic rebuked those who kept her enslaved: ‘The people of Boston boast themselves chiefly on their principles of liberty. One such act as the purchase of her freedom would, in our opinion, have done more honour than hanging a thousand [liberty] trees with ribbons and emblems.”

This quote illuminates the contradictions within the colonial fight for freedom, exemplified by Phillis Wheatley’s experience. Wheatley’s celebrated talent in Britain juxtaposed with her status as property in America underscores the hypocrisy in the colonial discourse on liberty. The English critic’s rebuke serves as a reminder of the selective valuation of freedom in colonial society, where the celebrated ideals of liberty did not extend to the enslaved. Wheatley’s own writings on liberty, contrasted with her enslaved status, highlight the ironies of a society fighting for its freedom while denying it to others based on race and status.

“‘Which is better—to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants not a mile away?’—Mather Byles, a Loyalist, 1774.”

This rhetorical question highlights the core debate of governance and liberty that fueled the American Revolution. Byles, a Loyalist, cleverly challenges the burgeoning Patriot sentiment by suggesting that local rule could be just as tyrannical as distant British rule. The quote encapsulates the tension between the desire for self-governance and the fear of anarchy or local despotism, laying bare the complexity of the colonial struggle for independence. It illustrates the uncertainties and conflicting loyalties that characterized the period, showcasing the depth of the ideological battle over what form of government best secures liberty and justice for its citizens.

“Every man was then a bold Patriot, felt himself equal to the Contest, […] but now when are fairly engaged, Death & Ruin stare us in the face and When nothing but the most intrepid Courage can rescue us from Contempt & disgrace, sorry I am to Say it many of those who were foremost in Noise, [now] Shrink coward like from the Danger and are begging pardon without striking a Blow.”

Robert Morris’s lament captures the fluctuating morale and challenges the Continental Army and the Patriot cause faced. His critique of those who were vocally supportive of independence but faltered when confronted with the war’s harsh realities speaks to the difficulties of sustaining a revolutionary movement. This quote illuminates the inner conflicts within the Patriot side, where enthusiasm and idealism met the grinding hardships of war. It reflects on the courage and resilience required not just to start a revolution but to see it through, underscoring the interactions of ideology, bravery, and human frailty in the struggle for independence.

“To win independence, the United States had to cultivate interdependence with European allies.”

This quote encapsulates the paradox at the heart of the American Revolutionary War. Despite the fervent desire for independence from British colonial rule, achieving this goal necessitated a form of dependence on European powers, particularly France and Spain. It underscores the theme of The Role of International Dynamics in the American Revolution, highlighting a fundamental irony of the war. The Patriots’ aspiration for self-reliance contrasted with the practical necessity for foreign assistance in arms, supplies, and naval support. This duality reflects broader themes in literature and history about the complex nature of freedom and the often-underappreciated role of collaboration in achieving ostensibly individual or national goals.

“Arnold’s betrayal also benefited his fellow officers. In October 1780, Congress bolstered their allegiance by extending the promised pensions beyond seven years to become lifetime awards.”

Benedict Arnold’s defection is one of the most notorious acts of treason in American history, yet this quote highlights an unintended positive outcome: the strengthening of loyalty among remaining officers through enhanced financial security. This situation illustrates the literary theme of unintended consequences, where an act meant to harm or demoralize instead catalyzes positive change. Arnold’s betrayal served as a catalyst for Congress to reassess the value and loyalty of the Continental Army’s officers, leading to improved conditions for those who remained faithful to the cause. This development also speaks to the adaptability and resilience of the Patriot cause, demonstrating how crises can lead to beneficial institutional reforms.

“The American union seemed on the verge of collapse, which threatened to expose France to British retaliation. This compelled Vergennes to offer additional loans to Congress and send 5,000 troops under Comte de Rochambeau to bolster Washington.”

This quote illustrates the fragility of the American Revolution and its global implications, especially for its French allies. It underscores the strategic and somewhat precarious alliance between France and the United States, with France risking British retaliation to support the American cause. This scenario highlights themes of risk, sacrifice, and the interconnectedness of nations’ fates during times of upheaval. The mutual dependence between the struggling American forces and their French allies demonstrates how revolutions are rarely isolated events but are instead part of a complex web of international relations and strategic interests.

“A Patriot declared, ‘A Tory is a thing whose head is in England and its body in America, and its neck ought to be stretched’ by hanging.”

This quote illustrates the deep animosity and polarization between Patriots and Loyalists during the Revolutionary War. The metaphorical depiction of Tories (Loyalists) as disjointed entities, with their loyalties and identities split between America and Britain, reflects the societal divisions and the contentious debate over allegiance. The violent imagery of hanging, suggested as a solution to this divided loyalty, speaks to the extremes of political discourse at the time and the real threats of violence faced by those who chose or were perceived to choose the side of the British Crown. It captures the harsh realities of ideological conflict and the personal risks entailed in public declarations of loyalty.

“The greatest sufferers lived in contested ‘neutral zones’ around British strongholds, particularly within fifty miles of New York City in eastern New Jersey, southern New York, and southeastern Connecticut.”

This quote highlights the war’s devastating impact on civilian life, especially in areas of intense military contention. The term “neutral zones” is laden with irony, as these areas were anything but neutral in their experiences of conflict. The geographical specificity adds a sense of realism to the narrative, grounding the war’s abstract political and ideological struggles in tangible locations that bore the brunt of military strategy. This passage underscores the indiscriminate suffering of war, where the boundaries between combatant and non-combatant blur and entire communities become collateral damage in a larger geopolitical struggle. It serves as a reminder of the war’s reach and its substantial impact on the daily lives of ordinary people.

“The same world will scarcely do for them and us.”

This assertion by George Rogers Clark, a key figure in the military campaign in the Northwest Territory, encapsulates the prevailing mindset of inevitability regarding conflict between Indigenous American peoples and European settlers. Clark’s comment is revelatory of the deep-seated belief in an insurmountable divide between “them” (Indigenous Americans) and “us” (European settlers), underpinning policies and actions that often led to the displacement and suffering of Indigenous populations. This quote frames the American expansion as a zero-sum game, echoing the broader themes of manifest destiny and the dispossession of Indigenous American lands that would define much of American history. It speaks to the tragic trajectory of relations between Indigenous Americans and European settlers, rooted in a belief in the incompatibility of coexistence.

“I walk in shadows.”

This introspective admission from Antonio Maria Bucareli, while discussing the challenges of administering the vast and diverse territories of New Spain, is rich in both its literal and metaphorical implications. It conveys the inherent difficulties of colonial governance over vast distances and diverse peoples, highlighting the limitations and uncertainties colonial administrators faced. The phrase “I walk in shadows” metaphorically captures the viceroy’s sense of navigating through uncertainty, dealing with the unknown, and perhaps the moral ambiguity of colonial rule. It reflects the broader aspects of empire and colonization, where power, despite its might, often operates in a realm of uncertainty and moral ambiguity.

“Our countrymen have all the folly of the ass and all the passiveness of the sheep in their compositions. […] If we are [to be] saved, France and Spain must save us.”

This quote reflects the desperation and frustration Alexander Hamilton and likeminded American revolutionaries felt at a critical juncture in the War of Independence. Hamilton’s comparison of his countrymen to “the ass” and “the sheep” utilizes animal imagery to critique what he sees as their stubbornness and lack of initiative, respectively. This harsh judgment underscores the gravity of the American situation in 1780, highlighting the pivotal role of foreign intervention in the survival and success of the revolutionary cause. It also speaks to the broader theme of reliance and skepticism towards allies within the revolution, illustrating the interaction between domestic aspirations and international diplomacy.

“The English buy peace rather than make it. Their concessions exceed all that I should have thought possible.”

This quote from the Comte de Vergennes, the French foreign minister, captures his surprise at the generous terms Britain offered the United States in the peace negotiations. Vergennes’s observation that the English “buy peace” with their concessions highlights the strategic decisions made by the British to prioritize the preservation of their global empire over maintaining control over the rebellious colonies. This insight reflects the broader strategic recalibrations of European powers in response to the changing geopolitical landscape of the late 18th century. It underscores the unexpected outcomes of diplomatic negotiations and the pragmatic acceptance of loss for the sake of broader strategic gains.

“A low-intensity war persisted in the countryside around the three seaports as British foragers clashed with Patriot patrols. In one late skirmish, John Laurens died in a reckless charge into a Loyalist ambush outside Charles Town.”

This excerpt portrays the lingering violence and chaos in the aftermath of the Revolutionary War, underscoring the persistent divisions and animosity between Loyalists and Patriots. The specific mention of John Laurens’s death in a “reckless charge” serves not only as a tragic illustration of the personal costs of war but also emphasizes the ongoing, unresolved conflicts within the nascent United States. This scene underscores the fragility of peace and the deep scars left by the war on the American landscape and psyche.

“In 1783-1784, the southern enslaved experienced a counterrevolution rather than a revolution as Patriots suppressed maroon settlements created in swamps during the chaotic war.”

This statement highlights the paradoxical nature of the American Revolution’s outcomes, particularly for enslaved African Americans. While the war purportedly advanced the ideals of liberty and freedom, for many enslaved individuals, the end of the conflict marked a return to heightened oppression rather than liberation. The suppression of maroon settlements—communities formed by escapees of enslavement—symbolizes the broader struggle for freedom and autonomy by African Americans and the harsh realities of a revolution that failed to address the fundamental injustices of slavery. This analysis exposes the contradictions at the heart of the revolutionary era, revealing a landscape marked by both aspirational ideals and their often-brutal negation in practice.

“The present aera is pregnant of great & strange events.”

This quote, attributed to George Washington in 1786, reflects the anticipation and apprehension felt by key figures during a pivotal era in American history. Washington’s words encapsulate the sense of uncertainty and potential that characterized the period following the American Revolution. As the nation stood on the cusp of establishing a new government, the future seemed fraught with both “great & strange events.” This statement, made by a leading figure of the time, underscores the transitional nature of this moment, highlighting the blend of hope and fear that accompanied the forging of a new republic.

“Never was there a political system introduced by less worthy means.”

George Minot’s critique of the Federalists’ tactics during the ratification of the Constitution exposes the contentious and manipulative political maneuvers employed to secure the Constitution’s adoption. His observation suggests a dissonance between the noble objectives of creating a unified nation and the dubious strategies deployed to achieve these ends. Minot’s candid admission reveals the complexities and imperfections in the founding of American democracy, suggesting that the path to establishing the nation’s governing document was marked by ethical compromises and power plays. This quote invites reflection on the nature of political compromise and the ethical ambiguities inherent in the formation of the United States.

“Jefferson insisted that the federal government should heed public opinion and tolerate free speech.”

This statement reflects Jefferson’s democratic ideals and his belief in the importance of civil liberties as foundational to the republic. It underscores a critical shift from a Federalist approach, which prioritized a strong central government, to a more decentralized vision that emphasized individual rights and state powers. Jefferson’s stance on free speech and public opinion highlights the tension between governance and liberty, a theme that resonates through American political discourse to this day. The quote encapsulates Jefferson’s efforts to align the government’s actions with the will of the people, advocating for a responsive and flexible approach to governance that respects individual freedoms.