Rampage at Virginia Tech, Blacksburg

Remove all ads!

Some of the more prominent American historians who have looked closely at the Revolution, have this to say about the "armed rebellion:"

About 1/3 of the colonial population were active in the Revolution. Many of the most prominent were centered in New England, particularly Boston. They were not really "settlers," but artisians, merchants and lawyers, in coastal areas that were pretty well populated (for the colonies): John and Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, John Handcock, etc. Many members of the Sons of Liberty would be a good example of the radicals who "fermented" and then formulated the Revolution in a meaningful and real way. A few were radical students at American colleges, such as Hamilton who was a student preaching the Revolution at King's College in NYC (now Columbia).

Next, would be the Virginians, largely upper class planters (but not all), such as Washington, Jefferson, Madison, the Lee brothers, Patrick Henry, etc.

Another 1/3 of the colonists were Tories - Upper class, usually in administrative postitions of appointment or patronage by the Crown or Parliment to the colonies (Governor Huchinson would be a good example, but even Ben Franklin's own son, William, was a Tory). But many middle-class merchants and artisians were loyalists as well.

That leaves us with the last 1/3 of the colonial population. These were often the settlers and farmers, who like others of the same in many other places in the world, were not really all that interested in politics, but largely employed in eking out a living. They were left with neither the time nor the inclination to involve themselves in the Revolution, unless it appreared suddenly on their own doorsteps (as will often happen in a war).

But to say that America was a population of gun-toting settlers who stared a Revolution is not really all that accurate. The Revolution was really stated by the rhetoric of young, well-educated lawyers - John Adams and Patrick Henry; Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. Some of them, like Samuel Adams, were really coffee-house radicals. But many were largely the products of Harvard, Princeton and King's College, more than they were inhabitants of the back-woods.

 

Thomas Paine is a good case in point, as he was hardly a "gun-toting settler." It was Franklin who was responsible for bringing him to America from England, where his writing became a sensation. After writing Common Sense, he traveled with Washington's army and was with him at Valley Forge.

Some historians view the court case over the "Writs of Assistance" as the spark that set off the Revolution. James Otis arguing against the Writs became a sensation in Boston, where the Revolution really began. It was a young John Adams who claimed that, "the child of independence was born" in the fires Otis' powerful argument in the courtroom that day in 1761.

 

I think it's hard to claim the American revolution was a revolution in more than name. It was an anti-colonial war.

If it was a revolution, the ruling class wouldn't have looked the same before and after the conflict. Yet, it did.

 

Even if the students were allowed guns, does that automatically mean that they'd be carrying them around with them?

 

I don't like disagreeing with you, AM, because you usually know what you are talking about (you know your stuff). But in this instance, I really, really disagree. And rather than hi-jack this thread for the Revolution, I would recommend you to American historian Gordon Wood's book, _The Radicalism of the American Revolution_. He makes just the opposite case for the Revolution, and very convincingly. Or if you would like, we can craft a separate thread on the Revolution.

 

That's alright. I'll look it up, and thanks for the recommendation.

Oooh. Lots of stuff about it on JSTOR. This looks like it'll be fun. And take a while. But fun!