The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution

Summary: A study of the ideas conveyed through pamphlets that led to the revolution of the colonies against England.

The original edition of this work, published in 1967, won both Pulitzer and Bancroft Prizes for Harvard historian Bernard Bailyn. What Bailyn does is to study the literature that preceded the revolution, much of it in pamphlets ranging from the more religiously based ones of Jonathan Mayhew to the more radical Thomas Paine. He identifies key themes that led to conflict and the Declaration of Independence.

Much of this was rooted in British pamphleteers including John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon, who protested what they saw as corruption in which royal ministers usurped the power of parliament. It was framed as a conflict of show more power versus liberty. The colonists began to seem themselves caught up in this conspiracy of power versus liberty, exemplified when the British quartered troops in Boston. Indeed, this conspiracy thinking, mirrored by the British acquired a kind of inevitability that led ineluctably to conflict. In one of his most sobering passages for our present moment, Bailyn writes:

“But the eighteenth century was an age of ideology; the beliefs and fears expressed on one side of the Revolutionary controversy were as sincere as those expressed on the other. The result, anticipated by Burke as early as 1769, was an ‘escalation’ of distrust toward a disastrous deadlock: ‘The Americans,’ Burke said, ‘have made a discovery, or think they have made one, that we mean to oppress them: we have made a discovery, or think we have made one, that they intend to rise in rebellion against us. . . we know not how to advance; they know not how to retreat. . . Some party must give way.’ “

The colonists took this basic opposition of liberty to power and transformed it to fit their context. Their cry of “taxation without representation” was a protest against the purported virtual representation they received in Parliament, in which measures could be decided in which they had no voice. Likewise, they challenged the abstract constitution of sovereign and Parliament, contending for a written constitution that clearly set the boundaries of government. Finally, in a colonial situation far removed from Parliament, they challenged its absolute authority, especially in matters of “internal” versus “external” taxes.

Bailyn then concludes with showing how this “contagion of liberty” spread to concerns about slavery, religious liberty, and the shape of their government, the idea of a democratic republic–one with no sovereign. Bailyn discusses the early deliberations including the fears that democracy could easily degenerate into anarchy, the developments of the ideas of bicameral legislatures, an executive, and of independent courts–designed to protect against both autocrats and anarchy.

Bailyn helps us understand not only the ideas that led to revolution but that led to how we constituted the United States, and the concern to uphold liberty against both absolute power and absolute disorder. It seems to me that what the early thinkers failed to anticipate was the partisan abyss that has developed that exacerbates the inefficiencies of a democratic republic resulting in a descent into disorder matched by the appeal of an authoritarian government that works. Ben Franklin, at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention was asked, “What kind of government have you given us?” Franklin replied, “A democracy, if you can keep it.” The question of our day seems to be “will we keep it?” Bailyn’s book can’t answer that for us, but it does trace the ideological heritage that led to the inception of our democratic republic. show less

The road to the writing of this Pulitzer Prize winning book began when Bailyn was asked to prepare a collection of pamphlets of the American Revolutionary War era. In doing so he began to see connections, common sources, and particularly how the American colonial experience transformed a strand of British libertarian opposition thought into a uniquely American ideology that caused an intellectual revolution as to the basis for sovereignty, rights and representation and consent that led not only to the colonies declaring independence but shaped our constitution and led to the undermining of slavery, the disestablishment of religion and an entirely new and radical social relationship.

I have my doubts that a general readership would find show more this book interesting: although I sure did. But for someone who has enough interest in American political thought this is illuminating. I have to concur with the New York Times reviewer who said that one "cannot claim to understand the American Revolution without reading this book." Or at least, it would be much harder: you'd have to undertake the same study Bailyn did and read thousands of 18th century pamphlets--which would be formidable enough.

The book is logically organized and lucidly written and I found that even for someone like myself who thought I knew a lot about the founding, who has read Thomas Paine's Common Sense and Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence and Hamilton, Madison and Jay's Federalist Papers there are some surprises. I took for granted the influence of Enlightenment thinkers such as Locke, it's not really surprising to learn that a tradition of covenant theology was one strand of thinking nor classical Latin works of or about the Roman republic such as by Cicero, Livy and Tacitus. It was a bit surprising to learn the British common law tradition had a large part in this political thinking--but particularly surprising was learning the role of relatively obscure opposition Whig writers. And Bailyn also examines how the practical experience of colonial government, from charters to town halls to provincial legislatures shaped the way the founders saw and used this legacy to create a new kind of government. If you want to go deeper into the foundation of American political thought, I'd say this book is invaluable. show less

Historian Bernard Bailyn’s Pulitzer-winning history of the ideology behind the American Revolution was the culmination of extensive work on a different project. Bailyn had accepted a request to compile a selection of pamphlets of the Revolutionary era for publication. In the process of collecting, selecting, and organizing the pamphlets, Bailyn absorbed their contents. A systematic study of the pamphlet literature would produce a different understanding of the political ideology of the American colonists than a piecemeal study of the same literature. Although the pamphlets and their authors are two and a half centuries old, the themes are still relevant to contemporary politics.

As usual, Bailyn is awful wordy. This book could be half as long with the same information.

Aside from that, it is a good look at the political climate of the American Revolution. He delves into the converging streams of political thought that enveloped the founders.

He uses a wide range of primary sources, but mainly the political pamphlets so in vogue in the 18th century.

This is probably not a book for casual reading, but is a great resource for students of the American Revolution.

Contrasts other histories of the American Revolution (from Charles Beard onwards) which posit that the AR was solely an economic struggle of the landed gentry against taxes.

Textual analysis of pamphlets, which were popular during the pre-revolutionary era. These were not as well-written as their English contemporaries Swift or Addison or Defoe, but they were popular and influential among colonial citizens, and that's what counted.

First, Bailyn begins with ideological and historical analysis. These pamphlets have a large number of references to classical authors (Livy, Polybius, Plutarch, Cicero) on an ideal Republic, but also to the thought of the Enlightenment (Locke, Rousseau).

The main body of the argument is the struggle of Power show more vs. Liberty in early thought, and external vs. internal rule, more clearly defined powers and roles of government, and later the idea of popular sovereignty. Too much power lead to a tyrannical system, and too much liberty leads to anarchy, so the proper balance is between them both.

He also expands upon the early colonial belief in 'conspiracies' of corrupt ministers and the extractive colonial bureaucracy as a pretext for freedom. Once the revolution was accomplished, however, the catchy phrases of 'liberty' and 'personal freedom' expanded into new spheres, and shortly after, there were already heated discussions on abolition.

A contrarian view, but an interesting and well thought-out one. show less

Through pamphlets and other written documents, Bailyn explores the ideas percolating in the American colonies—about the legitimate basis of authority, the nature of representation (whether it was local or general in nature, and thus whether an elected representative was supposed to work for the general good), and the appropriate division between king and legislature. Bailyn emphasizes that a lot of the men who ultimately became revolutionaries didn’t have a particularly well-worked out theory, but that they pushed theory in the direction of their concrete thinking about disobedience.

A thoughtful and insightful review of pre- and post-revolution literature to discern the ideologies underlying the revolution. The book started with a cataloging of pamphlets, broadsides and newspapers of the era. This major effort is a very well documented explanation of the arguments pro and con of an almost exhaustible list of topics. Much of the book is from quotations of the sources examined and the footnotes are voluminous and detailed. He examines the theories of governance, religion, economics, trade, and topics like slavery, royalty and the duty of man to God (as it relates to living in a commonly governed community). For anyone who has studied American history there is not much new here in terms of the substantive arguments; show more however, the close and tight analysis of the extant literature was a phenomenal effort, deserving of respect, admiration and utmost credibility of its intellectual (and actual) honesty.

This book is still very relevant as it touches on topics of governance which will always be pertinent. Many of the ideas and topics deserve more study and discussion now. Ideas such as term limits, responsiveness to the common good, preference to those with great wealth, and the privileges of the "nobility" are all relevant today as they were in the 1700's and indeed in ancient times.

Many references to early writers on government are mostly lost on us except for the pure academics of today. A reminder that we need to hear from upper level professors and heed them more than have in recent generations (IMHO). show less