The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution

Bailyn traces the influences of Revolutionary political thought in this book. Covering the many facets of political philosophy that shaped the Revolution, Bailyn successfully weaves them into what could be identified as the birth of American political thought. Reads better than one might think, and in fact reads very well. A must read for students of the American Revolution.

Many other reviewers have already done a good job summarizing this very influential book which won both the Pulitzer Prize for History and the Bancroft Prize in 1968 -- a rare achievement. In particular, I think R. Albin's review gives a very accurate summary of the book much along the lines of what I would have written. I would add that Bailyn extended his book, originally published in 1967, in 1992 with a postscript that covers ideological debates between the federalists and anti-federalists about the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. He points out that the same fears of tyranny and enslavement that lead to the Revolution also dominated the thoughts of the opponents of the new Constitution who viewed the creation of a strong central government with great suspicion and fear. Supporters of ratification (including the most famous of them, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison) had to work very hard to convince people that the new government would have sufficient checks and balances to protect the liberties and rights that the Revolution had gained them.

My only complaint about the book is its excessive use of overly long footnotes, some of which overflow onto the next page. These footnotes would have been easier to read as endnotes. Alternatively, some of the more interesting content in the footnotes could have been incorporated into the primary text. This might be the publisher's fault more than Bailyn's.

There are books which describe the "hows" and "whys" of history. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution is a definitive exemplar of the latter. In this Pulitzer Prize-winning classic Bernard Bailyn discusses the intellectual origins and controversies of the American Revolution.

From the beginning of the book it is clear that the research was extensive and scholarly. Baylin depended on sources both from the 17th century and more recent ones. He was also meticulous. To demonstrate what knowledge and principles were present in the 18th-century colonies, he devoted the first chapter entirely to the literature that permeated through the States during those times. Pamphlets and newspapers written by the leaders of the Revolution were read widely and had a great ideological impact on the people.

Baylin's examination of the Fathers' ideology concentrates on England and America of the 17th and 18th centuries. Ancient history is mentioned, however, as the author writes, "The classics of the ancient world are everywhere in the literature of the Revolution, but they are everywhere illustrative, not determinative, of thought. They contributed a vivid vocabulary but not the logic or grammar of thought..." He then proceeds to explore numerous European philosophers whose intellectual contributions to the Founding Fathers were significant. It becomes clear that the Founders - while attempting something historically unique - were Englishmen, adhering to the principles and beliefs that their ancestors had practiced for a long time. So why rebel?

In the mid-18th century English Parliament's actions were interpreted as an advent of tyranny for the American colonies. Among the things that were understood as a prelude to despotism, and profoundly analyzed by Baylin, was the threat of "standing army" and how it was dreaded by learned Americans. Standing army, the institution founded by the first emperor of Rome Augustus under the name of Praetorian Guard, had been responsible for the collapse of governments around the world and throughout history. On October 1st, 1768 two regiments of English "praetorian guard" disembarked in Boston, an event that indicated to the colonists that their liberty was on the brink of extinction. Later the troops were recalled, but the damage had been done. Many other interesting aspects of the events and ideas of the 1760s and `70s, including the notion of power and virtue, Federalist v. Anti-Federalist debates, etc., are in the book, but cannot be summarized here due to lack of space.

Essentially, the structure of the American rebellion was built on the English thought and law. Even though the Americans weren't born in England, they were English in mind and spirit. They loved their freedom and knew that when tyranny knocked on the door, military revolt was warranted.

In conclusion I'd like to say that this book is exceptionally penetrating and insightful at conveying the complexities of one of the most interesting periods of the past. Everything written above is only a tiny piece of the fascinating history that you'll find within its pages. I have one advice though: don't just read it, study it.

Good day to you.

It is quite common to be confronted with a partisan understanding of America's founding. To the secularists, all the founding fathers were deists at best. To the evangelicals, all the founding fathers were pious Christians. To the classicists, their religion was irrelevant; the founding was a return to the republics of Greece and Rome.

Bailyn presents a more nuanced version of the founding, in which there were many--often mutually contradicting--influences that engaged in co-belligerency to produce the Declaration of Independence, and later, the Constitution. Bailyn argues that various founding fathers were influenced more or less by the classics, the writers of the Enlightenment, the tradition of common law, covenant theology, and a group of opposition theorists, country politicians, and publicists. He argues that the last group carried the most influence.

Bailyn's book is penetrating and thorough. I would have given it five stars except that I do not necessarily agree that his latter group (the opposition theorists, etc.) are distinct from the previously identified traditions. I.e., what was it that drove these opposition theorists, if not the classics, covenant theology, etc.?

Overall, an excellent contribution to our understanding of the founding.

No phase of American history has attracted such talented and distinguished historians and produced such quality scholarship as the revolutionary period. This Pulitzer Prize winning history by Bernard Bailyn is a significant proof point.

Bailyn crafts his thesis around the concept of liberty and what it meant to the colonists. He frames the issue of liberty as being a tenuous balance between power, an aggressive force that had an insatiable appetite, and law or natural rights, an inherently passive force that requires vigilant protection. Bailyn maintains that the colonists developed their worldview from four primary sources: 1) the ancients, especially Cato and Cicero; 2) the Enlightenment, especially Locke and Rousseau; 3) English common law, especially Coke and Bacon; and 4) the radical English writers after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, especially Algernon Sidney and John Trenchard. Given their reading and understanding of these authors, a number of separate events and trends were perceived by the colonists as increasing evidence of conspiracy to deprive them of liberty and this is what ultimately led to the revolution, or so Bailyn argues. There were no less than seven such warning signs.

First, in 1763 the Anglican Church attempted to establish an American episcopate. Although many colonists were members of the Church others, such as Bostonian Jonathan Mayhew, saw the proposed episcopate as a veiled attempt to root out Presbyterianism and establish greater Crown control in the colonies. And the influential Enlightenment writers, such as Locke, warned of the oppressive effects of clergy on liberty.

Second, the Stamp Act of 1765 was seen as a danger signal of encroaching monarchal and ministerial authority. Some saw it as merely a pretense to incite revolt and thus provide a reason for intervention, while others argued it was a first small step in implementing wide-ranging restrictions on colonial behavior.

Third, extension of executive patronage throughout the colonies smacked of the corruption debilitating the home government back in London. Moreover, the officials were largely an inferior lot only too willing to bend to any and all ministerial demands.

Fourth, around this time attempts were made by colonial executive governments to undermine the colonial judicial system by refusing lifetime tenures to local judges and requests to have jury decisions open to appeal by the colonial executive authority, which was part of the colonial executive patronage system cited above.

Fifth, the power and jurisdiction of the vice admiralty courts overseeing the new rules regulating colonial trade were expanded. This issue was exacerbated by the fact that appointees were again part of the patronage system and often held multiple offices in the colonial administration, thus tightening the grip of the ministry on colonial affairs.

Sixth, the prosecution of political radical John Wilkes in London had a profound affect on the colonists' perceptions of government intension, Bailyn writes. Wilkes had fought tirelessly against Parliament's infringement on liberty and he used many of the same arguments as the colonists in excoriated the patronage system. Wilkes was deprived of his seat in Parliament even though he was fairly elected several times and he was ultimately imprisoned for his beliefs. Wilkes' arrest served as a harbinger of what was to come to those who opposed the ministry's new actions.

Finally, the arrival of British troops in Boston in 1768 at the request of colonial governor Bernard was viewed as definitive proof of a governmental conspiracy against liberty. Indeed, the presence of a standing army was widely perceived as a prerequisite for the imposition of tyrannical rule. The course of events in Denmark a century before when parliamentary liberties were curtailed still shone as a cautionary tale on the danger of executive power.

Thus, unconstitutional taxes, an invasion of placemen, encroachment of the established church, multiple office-holding by non-colonists, diluting the power of the local judiciary, the forceful suppression of Wilkes, and then a standing army - it all added to a conspiracy against liberty that needed to be opposed at the risk of life and home.

For anyone interested in gaining a better understanding of the events that led to the creation of the United States, there is no better place to start than here.