From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 [Paperback]

Pauline Maier (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0393308251 | ISBN-13: 978-0393308259 | Publication Date: January 17, 1992

"An intellectual interpretation of the American revolution that raises it to a new height of comprehensiveness and significance. A superbly detailed account of the ideological escalation . . . that brought Americans to revolution." —Gordon S. Wood, New York Times Book Review

In this classic account of the American revolution, Pauline Maier traces the step-by-step process through which the extra-legal institutions of the colonial resistance movement assumed authority from the British. She follows the American Whigs as they moved by stages from the organized resistance of the Stamp Act crisis of 1765 through the non-importation associations of the late 1760s to the collapse of royal government after 1773, the implication of the king in a conspiracy against American liberties, and the consequent Declaration of Independence. Professor Maier's great achievement is to explain how Americans came to contemplate and establish their independence, guided by principle, reason, and experience.

Editorial Reviews

Review

Written gracefully and clearly, From Resistance to Revolution fills a significant need for professional historians and general readers alike. Its fresh interpretation of American radicals in the crucible of revolution, based on substantial research and subtle reasoning, transcends its immediate subject and illuminates the meaning of radicalism, violence, and rebellion in American history. (Michael Kammen )

About the Author

Pauline Maier is William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor of History at MIT.

Product Details

• Paperback: 368 pages
• Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company (January 17, 1992)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0393308251
• ISBN-13: 978-0393308259
• Product Dimensions: 7.5 x 5.2 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #27,468 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • #35 in Books > History > Americas > United States > Colonial Period
  • #57 in Books > History > Americas > United States > Revolution & Founding

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

32 of 32 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Excellent and Pioneering Study, July 7, 2000

By 

R. Albin (Ann Arbor, Michigan United States) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 (Paperback)

In this very well written book, Professor Maier describes the evolution of colonial thought and political action from protest within an accepted formula of dissent to revolution. She shows how colonial actions were based upon a perceived constitutional pattern articulated by British dissident Whig intellectuals and political publicists. From the end of the Seven Years War to the outbreak of the revolution, she shows the leaders of colonial protest working step by step to maintain what they perceived as the proper relationship between rulers and governed. Their actions greeted usually with incomprehension by British officials and politicians. Eventually, the colonials concluded that revolution was the only remaining option. Maier is particularly interested in the violent and coercive acts of the pre-revolutionary period. She shows nicely that this kind of activity (eg, the Boston Tea Party and similar events) took place within an established tradition of public violence that was usually constrained and sanctioned by community leaders and reflected a public consensus. These type of actions were 'extra-legal' as opposed to 'illegal', and were driven by the sense that the British government had violated a social contract between rulers and governed, thus legitimizing extra-legal action. Maier shows also the irrational elements of the colonial cause. For example, many believed that British actions were part of a conspiracy that included French bribery to obtain a suitable settlement at the end of the Seven Years War. There was also considerable fear of the imposition of Anglican and even Roman Catholic religion. The Quebec Act, granting religous freedom to the francophone inhabitants of Quebec, was regarded perhaps the most threatening of the so-called Intolerable Acts. Readers who have picked up recent surveys of the Revolutionary period such as Middlekauf's The Glorious Cause or Bobrick's recent book will find Maier's arguments familiar. This is because Maier's work is now fundamental to understanding the American Revolution.

47 of 53 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Framers: Neither Anarchists nor Statists, November 22, 1999

By 

Glenn H. Reynolds "Instapundit" (Knoxville, TN USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 (Paperback)

As Gordon Wood pointed out in the New York Times, this is a terrific piece of work. It's also an underappreciated piece of work in today's debate over the scope of government. On the one hand we have people like Garry Wills arguing that, since the Framers weren't anarchists, the Constitution supports modern-day Big Government. On the other, we have equally-wacky people on the right arguing that, since the Framers were revolutionaries, Timothy McVeigh is some sort of hero.

In fact, both are equally wrong. As Maier's book points out, the colonial era was not one in which people accepted the 20th Century Weberian notion of the state as holding a monopoly on legitimate violence. Many sorts of "insurrectionary" violence -- of the sort that Gordon Wood calls "out of doors" political action -- were implicitly, and explicitly, recognized as legitimate.

But that's not the same as saying that all violence was okay. In fact, as Maier points out again and again, colonists recognized fundamental limits on the scope, degree, and targets of popular resistance. Violence might be okay, but mostly against property -- and when against individuals, only nonlethal violence in most situations. Maier's book shows a far more sophisticated theory than appears in today's left- and right-wing caricatures of the Framers. It's also wonderfully readable and copiously documented. It should get more attention -- and with luck it will.

20 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Compelling Thesis With Some Minor Flaws, July 31, 2005

By 

Gregory Canellis "Student of military history... (Tuckerton, NJ USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 (Paperback)

As the subtitle states, Pauline Maier follows the evolutionary process of the American resistance movement against Britain in the Colonies from 1765 to 1776. Maier traces the ideology of resistance back across the Atlantic to a radical faction of the Whig Party in Britain known as "Real Whigs." The Real Whigs believed that since the Glorious Revolution citizens have a right and a responsibility to speak out against the abuses of power and corruption within the government. Their aim, however, was not anarchy but rather to seek redress and reform through legal means. Maier argues this Real Whig ideology was transplanted to the American colonies through various forms of Whig literatures, particularly pamphlets by such political philosophers as John Locke and John Milton. In addition, Maier points out a further source of influence were the essays published by John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon as "Cato's Letters," a primary source the author draws from extensively. The Real Whig philosophy was thus exposed at various town meetings throughout the colonies, particularly those in New England.                 Maier shows how assorted forms of "popular uprisings" to the Crown had existed at regional levels during the first decades of the eighteenth century. It was not until the 1760s, however, that a series of taxes levied by Britain on a variety of imported goods resulted in an increase of acts of protest and violence by the colonial radicals. Maier emphasizes how these early grievances were expressed though moderately peaceful means. The common practice of tarring and feathering of tax collectors, and later Stamp men was first initiated during this early period and for the most part became the extent of the personal violence practiced by the radicals.                 According to Maier, the Stamp Act of 1765 proved a watershed event for the resistance movement. Two bloody riots in Boston in August of that year bordered on chaos, but offered valuable lessons for the resistance leaders. From this point on, argues Maier, resistance against Britain became an organized movement whose centralized tactics spread throughout the colonies. The epicenter of the resistance movement was the organization dubbed the Sons of Liberty; first established in New York, with chapters soon rising up in other cities and towns throughout the colonies. Maier emphasizes that initially the colonists wanted to remain loyal to Great Britain. Reforms of oppressive governmental policies set forth against the colonials were their ultimate goal. The Sons of Liberty devised a strategy of systematic resistance through "extra-legal" not "illegal" means. If violence became necessary, destruction against official property, was preferred over harm to individuals. Maier illustrates the dismantling of tax offices and the Boston Tea Party, as examples of the former, while pointing out that rarely were official's homes destroyed. Moreover, effigies became the focus of frustration, not the officials themselves. When the Stamp Act was repealed, the resisters felt they had achieved a great victory and were content to return to life as usual under the mother country. It was only after Britain's escalation of "Intolerable Acts, however, that the resisters peaceful means proved inadequate. Maier concludes that revolution was the last resort for the colonial radicals and initiated only after all peaceful means were exhausted. Maier has written an intellectual history integrating a cause and effect methodology centering on a small group of radical resistors. The early publication date (1972) suggests the eclectic methodologies borrowed from the social sciences were not as prevalent in early American historiography as would be the case in the closing decade of the twentieth century. The author attempts to broaden her study to include the mid-Atlantic and southern colonies, however, a heavy emphasis on New England, particularly Boston, seems unavoidable. Maier prefers to consult mostly primary sources and utilizes the work of contemporary scholars sparingly. Wherever possible, period secondary sources, such as William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England (1771) are checked. The author cites various period correspondence, pamphlets, and a plethora of town Gazettes detailed in copious notes. Some criticisms. First, Maier fails in her efforts to effectively include all the colonies in her study. A comparative regional study far beyond the reaches of Maier's work would be needed to do justice to the complexity of the inter-colonial resistance movement. In addition, throughout the work the author assumes a considerable amount of knowledge from her readers. This approach is particularly evident with her treatment, or lack thereof, of the core of colonial radicals. For example, in the introduction, Maier explains how "A significant group of men . . . emerged as strong American partisans during the Stamp Act crisis and remained in the forefront of opposition to Britain on into the war." She goes on to list these prominent participants: "Christopher Gadsden in Charleston; Cornelius Harnett in North Carolina; Richard Henry Lee in Virginia; John Lamb and Isaac Sears in New York; Samuel Adams in Boston; . . . [and] Thomas Young . . . in Albany."   Other than mere mention, Maier does not go into much detail about the lives or backgrounds of these men. More focus on this core group would have added a human dimension to her intellectual study. The fact that these men cover a wide geographical base reinforces the notion that Maier could have delved deeper into the inter-colonial aspect of the resistance movement. Aside from these nit-picks, Maier supports her thesis well throughout the book. Maier's argument centers on the premise that organized resistance as opposed to mob violence was the preferred method of expressing grievances, with revolution becoming a consideration only as a last resort. The author adequately demonstrates the resistance movement had historical precedence by tracing its origins back to the Real Whig faction in Britain. Maier's work is significant in that she shows that the colonial "radicals" were more about the Boston Tea Party and less about the more violent Boston Massacre and Lexington-Concord scenarios so prominently expressed in colonial historical literature.