A comprehensive account of this epoch must necessarily focus on the numerous contradictions. This historical phase may resemble a mosaic that, despite the beauty of its individual components, does not give a self-contained overall picture. Such a consideration must do justice to the Janus-headedness of this movement. On the one hand, she wasearly modern and particularist thinking, which acted in a strongly backward-looking manner. On the other hand, it held the potential for a future-oriented and consequential universalism.
The transition to modern industrial society
Historically, this movement can be located precisely in the time of the transition to industrial modernism. This classification has far-reaching consequences for any reception of these events, especially if it has been elevated to the national founding myth. Much of today’s North American society is incomprehensible without the knowledge of the pre-modern origins of its political system.In particular, one must never forget how alien early modern times are to us humans of the 21st century. The actors acted partly from completely different motives, whereby the aristocratic concept of honour and religion continued to play a central role.
The importance of historical context
Despite all the enlightenment and all the skepticism of the elite layers, the terms at that time meant something completely different than today. This may be perceived as deficient, but such an accusation would be a pure anachronism. People are always children of their time and do not know what will follow from their thoughts and actions in the future. It can therefore not be enough toMovement only from the side of British values and ideas. This does not mean renouncing a historical discussion of these concepts.
Linking ideas and material interests
These ideas must be understood not only as time-bound, but also as strictly contextual. Concepts do not suddenly become worthless if they are linked to interests, intrigues, and local and random constellations. Such links often defy any premature theorization. However, you get a more appropriate and critical approach if youthe importance of smuggling. Slavery and land speculation must also be taken into account when formulating the concept of freedom at the time.
The global impact of ideals of freedom
In this way, the timelessness and locationlessness of supposedly universal thoughts is lost. The semantic and socio-cultural dynamics emanating from this era can only be seen in this way. Only in this transformation process did the ideals of freedom have a transnational and global effect. The revolution in North America was not originally a universalist project.but one that should change the world in the long term.
The dawning of a new era
The epoch of the North American independence movement is generally allowed to begin with the Seven Years’ War. There are no really convincing reasons to move away from this established convention. However, it is much harder to pinpoint the end of this revolutionary era. The Peace of Paris in 1783 ended the War of Independence, but was otherwise a rathermarginal event. In any case, the discussion about the Constitution of 1787 must be included.
The institutional stabilisation of the upheavals
This document consolidated the revolutionary achievements at the institutional level. From a social and cultural-historical point of view, however, other important events lend themselves. Without these events, it is difficult to correctly classify the dynamics unfolded by the movement. It is the transition to universal suffrage for all free white men in the years from1810. Equally important are the repositioning of social elites and the emerging market-economy capitalism.
The social upheavals of the following decades
The communication revolution in the years from 1830 onwards fundamentally changed public discourse. Added to this is the acceptance of mass democracy by the opposition forces in the same decade. The second evangelical revival movement and many other events also point to a change of epoch around the year 1835. Thinking very radically, one could imagine the age ofIndependence movement until the armed uprising led by Dorr in 1842. In the course of this, the last royal charter from 1663 was suspended.
The end of colonial elite rule
This finally ended the rule of the old colonial elites. Similarly, almost at the same time as the armed tenancy resistance in 1838, the supremacy of the semi-feudal layers in New York collapsed. In the present elaboration, a middle course is chosen. The end of the War of 1812, the Second War of Independence with Great Britain, decides therevolutionary epoch. Further events will only be briefly discussed in their respective factual context.
The linguistic classification of the groups involved
Finally, two remarks on the choice of words are necessary. It is refrained from speaking of the rebels as Americans, as at no time did they represent a majority of the colonial population. Therefore, they are referred to as either opposition forces, rebels, patriots, or insurgents. Their American counterparts run under King’s allegiance orLoyalists. Strictly speaking, they were predominantly not British conservatives, but moderate oppositionists.
The designation of the British actors
The British can also appear as Englishmen for the sake of variety. This makes particular sense, especially since many of the commanders were actually English and not Welsh, Scottish or Irish. It is a little harder with the names of the British aristocrats. They are usually listed by their title name. So there are terms like Grafton instead of Fitzroy or Newcastleinstead of Pelham.
The peculiarities of naming
A particular difficulty, however, is Sir William Pitt the Elder. As Prime Minister, he is traditionally called Pitt, but from 1766 he became Earl of Chatham. His party supporters subsequently traded as supporters of Chatham. This usage is consistently maintained, that is, Pitt and Chatham are one person. Their followers are accordinglyreferred to as a Chatham follower.
Screenshot youtube.com
