Were the causes of the American Revolution economic or political in origin?

In 1763, Britain and France settled the conflict that was the ‘Seven Years War’ with ‘Peace of Paris’; with it British territorial hold in North America grow considerably. This period in time can be described as the height of success for the first British Empire: “a period of ‘prosperity and glory unknown to any former age’ seemed to be opening for Great Britain and her Colonies”. The Empire was vast in its reach and although already possessing a strong hold in India, her growth in America during this period was phenomenal. However with this great growth came great responsibility, British imperialist now had a greater administrative burden than they had ever previously faced. First America proved fiercely difficult to maintain from London, funds for defence and state matters needed to be found and with the 17th century American colonist proving to be “such good Englishmen”, ideological differences were just around the corner and was quickly followed by war. A war, which by the accounts of some, brought about the end of the First British Empire. John Miller in his offering of the origins of the revolutionary war, explains that the growing conflicts between the British imperialist and the colonist were considerable; with the Englishmen finding the Americans as being “of a disposition haughty and insolent, impatient of rule, disdaining subjection, and by all means affecting independence”. With Anglo-American relationship so rife with tension, the breakdown of American society at this point was arguably inevitable and culminated in the so-called American Revolution of 1776-1783.

“The immediate threat to American liberty and well-being after 1765 came not from the restrictions imposed upon colonial trade and manufacturing but from Parliament’s efforts to raise a revenue in the colonies. It was the invasion of American’s political rights by Parliament after the Peace of Paris, which precipitated the struggle between the mother country and colonies and inspired the ideas and slogans of the American Revolution. Economic grievances played a secondary part in the patriots’ propaganda; from 1765 to 1776, political issues were kept uppermost.”

Miller argues that the American Revolution was a result of growing economical and political tensions between the Americans and the English. Following the end of the seven years war

in 1763, Britain decided a standing army should remain in North America, (much to the distrust of the colonist) to ensure civil obedience, in recently ceded French regions and repel any further French threat. However the maintenance of such a presence was no small feat, revenue was needed and the imperialist felt that the colonist should at least contribute to the provision of it, if not fully foot the bill. Moreover the integral rule played by American in securing British victory in the Seven Years War, reminded many of the fundamental rule the American colonies could hold for British Imperial success and as such a necessary tightening of British commercial grip and interest was deemed necessary by some. “Commercialism, the desire for advantage and profit in trade and industry, was the bottom struggle between England and America…. The governing classes of the old country wished to exploit the American colonists for their own use…the Americans desired to work their land and carry on their trade for themselves”. Egerton explains that the latter view of Britain raping the colonies of all resources holds less truth than the former, where Britain’s mercantilist approach was largely for the preservations of the colonies. Arguing that even the most seemingly selfish of acts passed by Britain on the colonist proved to be for their supreme benefit. Quoting Burke, he explains that America was borne of the successes of the 1651 Navigation Act: “The Act of Navigation attended the colonies from their infancy, grew with their growth and strengthened with their strength”. With a history were mercantilist policies had proven so mutually beneficial for both the imperialist and the colonies, it made sense that a similar approach was again used where a new question of revenue had risen.

This is a preview of the whole essay

In 1763, £200,000 had been the estimated cost of maintaining the standing army in the colonies; Christie explains that taxation was Britain’s strongest device for revenue raising. The Sugar Duties Act of 1764 and the Stamp Act of 1765, were two such acts passed by Parliament. However, these were very poorly received by the colonist fearing that the acts marked the beginning of growing British interference with colonial concerns. Whilst the Sugar Act limited American trade by imposing duties, the Stamp act was a direct tax against the colonist, taxing legal documents. Both taxes were unsuccessful in raising revenue of any substance and heightened tensions between the English and the American’s. The Sugar Duties Act was used by the British to keep in check illicit trade by the colonist, who in turn resented such acts on a ground of taxation without due representation (a problematic theme which will resurface time and again in this conflict). “The Parliament of Great Britain insists

upon taxing the colonies; and they refuse to be taxed by a Parliament in which they are not represented”. With the creation of the Stamp Act tensions grow stronger and in late 1765 riots against British tyranny and the Stamp Act ensued. Then in 1766 the “Twin Brothers” act was passed. Following the controversy surrounding the Stamp Act, Parliament decided that its repeal was necessary, not without due concession by the colonies. For along with the Stamp Act repeal came the Declaratory Act, whereby Britain “claimed authority over the colonies in ‘all cases whatsoever’ and declared that they always had been and ‘are ought to be’ subject to the British Crown and Parliament”.

The problem of the Stamp Act, having started on an economical basis quickly became a political issue. It outlined key ideological conflicts between the two sides. For the British, “liberty had ceased to be an ideal to be fought for: leadership in the struggle for popular rights had fallen…and the prevailing ideal was not freedom but the maintenance of the established order”. Whilst for the Americans liberty was still regarded as paramount and being “the highest goal of human effort and the energies of the ablest men were enlisted on its behalf”. From 1765-1775, the American revolutionary movement was largely a struggle to impress unto the British, American conceptions of law and justice. According to Miller, “The dispute was waged over the nature of the British Constitution and the rights of subjects; the goal of the colonist was to reform the British Empire”, not necessarily withdraw from it. Miller argues that up until 1775, the ‘great strength’ of the revolutionary movement was the American desire to claim their rights as Englishmen. “We claim nothing but the liberty and privileges of Englishmen, in the same degree, as if we had still continued among our brethren in Great Britain”. It would seem that for the most part the colonist considered themselves as Englishmen and the earliest motivation for the revolutionaries was to acquire parliamentary representation accordingly with their rights as ‘free-born’ Englishmen. Boston was arguably at the forefront of this political movement. The Boston riots 1768 following the Townshend Duties demonstrate a growing move towards aggression from the colonist. In 1770 the Boston ‘massacre’ occurs whereby British troops fire at the crowd and first blood between the two sides is drawn. Following this, the British make a symbolic gesture on a

repeal of all acts, excluding those on tea, towards softening the growing tensions. However the proviso that was the remaining tea duties would prove deeply problematic, and this would once again take place on Bostonian soil; with the Boston Tea Party of 1773.

Contra to the American view of their rights as Englishmen, the English held the colonist as “runaways”and as such unworthy of the rights of ‘free-born’ Englishmen. Miller explains that the Americans were not “recognised as fellow subjects…they were held no more the equals of Englishmen than were the King’s subjects in Hanover”. Propaganda was greatly used in Britain, portraying the colonist as cowards who deserted the state “in the glorious struggle against arbitrary power in Church and State”. Conspiracy theories were widely publicised and a ‘them and us’ mentality cultivated. Popular publications maintained a sense of superiority for the English above the colonist. On the 7th January 1775, the ‘Public Ledger’ wrote “The very word COLONY, implies DEPENDENCY”. “When Englishmen spoke of ‘our colonies’ they meant that they were masters and the colonists subjects; and so they must remain forever….The status of colonies was fixed for all time; regardless of their strength and population they must remain inferior to the mother country”.

With such polarised views tensions were exacerbated. Following the Boston Tea Party, the last appeasers America were no more, all Britons turned against the colonist considering their actions to be considerable criminal. Where as previously the British had somewhat retreated in the face of active opposition from the colonist, their response to the Tea Party was altogether different believing that “the colonist must be chastised into submission”. It was a matter of public national and international pride, because in order for Britain to maintain her role as a great power in Europe, she must not allow “ ‘a petty province’… to hurl defiance across the Atlantic with impunity”. The Coercion Act was the British response to such rebellion. These along with the Quebec Act (both in 1774), were poorly received by the colonist and with it so came the ‘First Continental Congress’, a body formed to organise resistance. On the 5th of September 1774, 45 delegates from around the colonies met in Philadelphia and a new phase in American politics began. “The Distinctions between Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers and New Englanders are no more. I am not a

Virginian, but an American”. Americans began to see themselves as a nation all on their own as opposed to colonist or Englishmen. The motivation that was the acquisition of rights as Englishmen, was dropped in favour of a call for total independence from a nation (Britain), which refused to recognise their perceived legitimate rights. A call for independence was now born and so with it the ignition for war.

It would seem that the causes of the American War of Independence was both economic and political in nature. The British enforced unpopular economic policies for the good for the colonies, though the nature of the Sugar Act can arguably be described as an act of exploitation rather than preservation. These acts likewise, gave weight to political issues and brought resultant tensions to light and thus armed conflict or at best total concession for one side (though improbable), was necessary for such conflicts to be laid to rest. “As long as Americans and Englishmen held irreconcilable views as to the nature of the empire and the rights of subjects, it is clear that a collision resulting in the break-up of the empire could scarcely be avoided”. Mrs Schuyler van Rensselaer, in Egerton’s account of the causes of the American Revolution, explains that the revolution is in fact a case natural evolution. “The Revolution began when the history of the colonies began….It was the culminating point of a long and slow evolution….The real revolution which resulted in an armed revolt was a state of feeling….And this mental attitude began unconsciously to shape itself when the first Dutch and English settlers established themselves along the American seaboard”.

The causes of the American Revolution were numerous, be it economically based, politically forced or the very essence of the union/relationship between the English and the colonist. Whatever the cause, American declaration of independence came to pass in July 1776 and with it came British occupation of New York and so began the war. Egerton argues that the American Revolution was “perhaps, the most important event in modern history”, arguing that without it the French Revolution, which is often held to be more important, would have in fact happened “at a different time and in a different manner” had the American Revolution not created the idea of “a nation-state”. Moreover the American Revolution and the acquisition of independence resulted in the creation of what is now arguably the world’s

only super power. Who would have guessed one document “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America”, would lead to a nation so vast and powerful, its strength and reach has exceeded that of the nation from which it arose.

Bibliography

I. R. Christie, ‘Wars and Revolutions: Britain 1760-1815’, Edward Arnold, 1982
J. C. Miller, ‘Origins of the American Revolution’, Stanford University Press, 1959
H. E. Egerton, ‘The causes and character of the American Revolution’, Oxford University Press, 1923
J. R. Pole, ‘The Decision For American Independence’, Edward Arnold, 1975
R. W. Tucker & D. C. Hendrickson, ‘The Fall of the First British Empire’, John Hopkins University Press, 1982
Edward Countryman, ‘The American Revolution’, Penguin, 1985
I. R. Christie & B. W. Labaree, ‘Empire or Independence 1760-1776’, Phaidon, 1976
P. J. Cain & A. G. Hopkins, ‘British Imperialism 1688-2000’, Longman, 2002

J. C. Miller, ‘Origins of the American Revolution’, Stanford University Press, 1959, p 1

Ibid., p 1

Ibid., p 25

H. E. Egerton, ‘The causes and character of the American Revolution’, Oxford University Press, 1923, p 50

Ibid., p 48

I. R. Christie, ‘Wars and Revolutions: Britain 1760-1815’, Edward Arnold, 1982, p 87

Egerton, p 190

Miller, p 158

Ibid., p 158

Ibid., p 167

Ibid , p 167

Ibid., p 167

Ibid., p 168

Miller, p 204

Ibid., p 204

Ibid., p 355

Ibid., p 356

J. R. Pole, ‘The Decision For American Independence’, Edward Arnold, 1975, p 10

Miller, p 168

Egerton, p 2

Ibid., p 1

Pole, p 108

Were the causes of the American Revolution economic or political in origin?

This is a preview of the whole essay

Bibliography

Document Details

Related Essays

How far was the Civil Rights Movement in the United States a 'revolution fr...

Why would you say that American conception of rights is so individualistic?...

To what extent was the New Deal a turning point in the development of Nativ...

The Philosophy of Burke