This essay serves as the first in what will be an ongoing series of essays attempting to reinterpret American history. The American Founding was a revolution. At first blush, this framing might seem to be an oxymoron. To “found” suggests a state of stability if not permanence—it conveys an idea that something is to be cast in stone and put above or outside the change of time. By contrast, a “revolution” suggests radical change, the kind of change and movement that disrupts, convulses, and is very much
You've whetted my appetite for the next essays in this series. I didn't think I was going to read this, but once in I found myself captured. I've always liked history, and your writing reminds me why.
It was a secession not a revolution. The Founders started out wanting the traditional rights of Englishmen and only declared independence when they figured out they couldn't get them within the confines of the British Empire. In other words, it followed in the path of every other secession in history and created some new models in the process. All colonial struggles are secessionist in nature.
Yeah, America in 1830 was a lot different than Britain in 1630 or 1730 but so was Britain. Intervening factor was a real revolution-the Industrial Revolution which profoundly changed every place it touched.
I first have to say your essay is very well written and one I enjoyed reading. History is a passion of mine and I appreciate finding your Substack from a Note. Going to have to read more of your writing starting with this series and the linked essays you have in this one. So, a new subscriber gained.
Very interesting content, thanks. I would love to read more about your thoughts on the French Revolution and how it compares to the American, especially since there’s an interpretation that tries to paint the American Revolution as conservative, non-idealistic, and non-radical.
The Puritans are quite often given a bad rap. They are highly misunderstood these days; I would recommend, if you haven't already done so, studying them on their own terms.
You've whetted my appetite for the next essays in this series. I didn't think I was going to read this, but once in I found myself captured. I've always liked history, and your writing reminds me why.
It was a secession not a revolution. The Founders started out wanting the traditional rights of Englishmen and only declared independence when they figured out they couldn't get them within the confines of the British Empire. In other words, it followed in the path of every other secession in history and created some new models in the process. All colonial struggles are secessionist in nature.
Yeah, America in 1830 was a lot different than Britain in 1630 or 1730 but so was Britain. Intervening factor was a real revolution-the Industrial Revolution which profoundly changed every place it touched.
I first have to say your essay is very well written and one I enjoyed reading. History is a passion of mine and I appreciate finding your Substack from a Note. Going to have to read more of your writing starting with this series and the linked essays you have in this one. So, a new subscriber gained.
Very interesting content, thanks. I would love to read more about your thoughts on the French Revolution and how it compares to the American, especially since there’s an interpretation that tries to paint the American Revolution as conservative, non-idealistic, and non-radical.
The Puritans are quite often given a bad rap. They are highly misunderstood these days; I would recommend, if you haven't already done so, studying them on their own terms.
Gordon Wood wrote an entire book on this idea titled "The Radicalism of the American Revolution."
My reaction was the same!