I read a very interesting post this morning. It was by C. Bradley Thompson, The Redneck Intellectual, who is a Professor of Political Science at Clemson University. The post entitled, “Rethinking the American Revolution”, made a strong argument that the American Revolution and the Revolutionary War were two separate things. The former in the words of John Adams began in 1760 while the latter started on April 19, 1775 and concluded with the Treaty of Paris in 1783.
By Adams’s account, the true American Revolution was an intellectual, moral, social, religious, constitutional, political, and economic revolution—indeed, a radical revolution—that dramatically altered the American way of life.
Up until this time, the distance between Great Britain and their American colonies and the hand’s off approach of the British government worked to the advantage of both the colonists and Britain. On the one hand, the colonies were allowed to grow in their own way free from most of the constraints of “Old Europe”. On the other, the British Empire had the most prosperous colonies in the New World. Anglo-Irish statesman Edmund Burke referred to it as “salutary neglect” meaning Britain let America grow in its own way free from onerous oversight and both sides reaped the benefits.
Fast forward to the 1770s and the relationship has become definitely strained. Radical colonists in Boston held their “tea party” to protest the imposition of taxes on tea with the Townshend Acts in 1773. Later, the ladies of Edenton, North Carolina held their own tea party which was a bit more civilized.
The Edenton Tea Party had its 250th anniversary in October. That tea party led by the ladies of Edenton was an agreement to boycott all British tea and cloth. Given that tea drinking was a daily activity and that social gatherings were judged on both the quantity and quality of tea consumed, this was a serious political statement.
The women of Edenton signed an agreement saying they were “determined to give memorable proof of their patriotism” and could not be “indifferent on any occasion that appears nearly to affect the peace and happiness of our country . . . it is a duty that we owe, not only to our near and dear connections . . . but to ourselves.”
Being that the protest was led by women, the news of it shocked the Old World. They could not conceive of a political action led by women and thus they mocked it. London publications published satirical cartoons and chided the North Carolinians for not being able to control their women.
It is my understanding that Professor Thompson will be publishing a two-volume set titled Political Thought of the American Revolution: A Reader. They will contain original source documents pertaining to conflict between Britain and America from both before and after the Revolutionary War. I’ll be interested to see them when published.
I subscribe to that. I have been critical of people, including him, who call the War of Independence the American Revolution. I regard it as a war of secession. However, this notion of two parallel events has made me think which is all I really ask for from an author.
by 
I especially like the closing sentiment.
I subscribe to that. I have been critical of people, including him, who call the War of Independence the American Revolution. I regard it as a war of secession. However, this notion of two parallel events has made me think which is all I really ask for from an author.