Finished reading Richard Archer's As If an Enemy's Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution this morning.
It was, admittedly, not about the occupation I thought it would be about. Archer looks at the occupation lasting from 1768 to 1770 in response to colonial resistance to trade regulations, not the later occupation under Thomas Gage the preceded the "shot heard 'round the world." This makes the terminology somewhat more perilous, since the term "occupation" generally implies the invasion of a hostile, foreign power, a concept only marginally applicable in 1774 and certain out of place in 1768. Still, a primary question in my own work is how to define "occupation" with regard to the Revolution, so Archer's choice of subject was quite relevant.
Archer does an excellent job in making his characters feel real and vital. Several major players carry over from chapter to chapter (Thomas Hutchinson being the most noteworthy example) and, consequently, one is able to see how they evolved during the crisis. Archer begins in 1763 with the planning out of new British taxes, particularly the new Sugar Tax. The first 100 pages are devoted to popular colonial resistance, disputes within the government, the development of non-importation/consumption pacts, etc. The occupation itself doesn't begin until chapter 7. That and the following chapter (suitably titled "Occupation") are the most enlightening for my purposes as they chronicle the conflicts between the populace and the soldiery. There were questions of where the army was to be housed and who was to pay for it, of what role they would play vis-a-vis the existing town watch, of whether they would be allowed to take jobs from dockworkers, and of the proper interactions between the citizens and the off-duty redcoats.
For example, British soldiers and officers stationed in American cities often grew bored and sought out or constructed unorthodox forms of entertainment, a phenomenon apparent in Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Charleston before and during the war. This could at times involve harassing locals, but it occasionally took on more sophisticated forms. On page 125, Archer records that members of the British government in Boston joined with military officers from the army and navy, as well as various members of the town, to set up bi-weekly entertainments and dinner and dancing. The resistant colonists, concerned lest such finery should win people over to the British cause, cautioned the "Young Ladies of Boston" against participating, lest consorting with such people ruin their reputation. They went so far as to create their own, competing, dancing night, the Liberty Assembly, to draw the naive and vulnerable away from the supposedly damaging influence of British military officers.
Though these two chapters (as well as chapter 10), provide insights into the nature of the occupation, there are times when Archer seems to lose track of his subject. Chapter 9 (The Merchants and John Mein) resumes the story of non-importation and the infighting among the merchants and elite of Boston. Though the events of this chapter all transpire in the midst of the occupation, reading it one could easily forget that there thousands of red coats walking the streets of the city.
Archer's final chapters focus on the Boston Massacre, providing an extremely detailed and interesting account and making good use of his earlier work to show how the "Massacre on King Street" was the culmination of more than a year of frustration and antipathy between Bostonians and the occupying soldiers. Accounts of the "massacre" vary wildly, and it is evident that Archer has made up his mind on a few key issues and presents them with little qualification. Still, his interpretation, if not the only one, is a sound one and generally consistent (though I disagree with his conclusion that the eight grenadiers facing a belligerent crowd of ~125 sailors, laborers and artisans could not have been in a life-threatening situation simply because they were the only one's carrying firearms). His narrative at this point possesses that elusive ability to be gripping even though we know how the story ultimately ends. His account of the trials of Preston and the soldiers is also fairly good (though he clear feels they got off too lightly), detailed enough to be intriguing but not so long as to slow down the narrative.
Over all, the book was enjoyable and it felt wonderful to finally read a history book cover-to-cover at a leisurely pace. It's been a long time.
Archer, Richard. As If an Enemy's Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
It was, admittedly, not about the occupation I thought it would be about. Archer looks at the occupation lasting from 1768 to 1770 in response to colonial resistance to trade regulations, not the later occupation under Thomas Gage the preceded the "shot heard 'round the world." This makes the terminology somewhat more perilous, since the term "occupation" generally implies the invasion of a hostile, foreign power, a concept only marginally applicable in 1774 and certain out of place in 1768. Still, a primary question in my own work is how to define "occupation" with regard to the Revolution, so Archer's choice of subject was quite relevant.Archer does an excellent job in making his characters feel real and vital. Several major players carry over from chapter to chapter (Thomas Hutchinson being the most noteworthy example) and, consequently, one is able to see how they evolved during the crisis. Archer begins in 1763 with the planning out of new British taxes, particularly the new Sugar Tax. The first 100 pages are devoted to popular colonial resistance, disputes within the government, the development of non-importation/consumption pacts, etc. The occupation itself doesn't begin until chapter 7. That and the following chapter (suitably titled "Occupation") are the most enlightening for my purposes as they chronicle the conflicts between the populace and the soldiery. There were questions of where the army was to be housed and who was to pay for it, of what role they would play vis-a-vis the existing town watch, of whether they would be allowed to take jobs from dockworkers, and of the proper interactions between the citizens and the off-duty redcoats.
For example, British soldiers and officers stationed in American cities often grew bored and sought out or constructed unorthodox forms of entertainment, a phenomenon apparent in Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Charleston before and during the war. This could at times involve harassing locals, but it occasionally took on more sophisticated forms. On page 125, Archer records that members of the British government in Boston joined with military officers from the army and navy, as well as various members of the town, to set up bi-weekly entertainments and dinner and dancing. The resistant colonists, concerned lest such finery should win people over to the British cause, cautioned the "Young Ladies of Boston" against participating, lest consorting with such people ruin their reputation. They went so far as to create their own, competing, dancing night, the Liberty Assembly, to draw the naive and vulnerable away from the supposedly damaging influence of British military officers.
Though these two chapters (as well as chapter 10), provide insights into the nature of the occupation, there are times when Archer seems to lose track of his subject. Chapter 9 (The Merchants and John Mein) resumes the story of non-importation and the infighting among the merchants and elite of Boston. Though the events of this chapter all transpire in the midst of the occupation, reading it one could easily forget that there thousands of red coats walking the streets of the city.
Archer's final chapters focus on the Boston Massacre, providing an extremely detailed and interesting account and making good use of his earlier work to show how the "Massacre on King Street" was the culmination of more than a year of frustration and antipathy between Bostonians and the occupying soldiers. Accounts of the "massacre" vary wildly, and it is evident that Archer has made up his mind on a few key issues and presents them with little qualification. Still, his interpretation, if not the only one, is a sound one and generally consistent (though I disagree with his conclusion that the eight grenadiers facing a belligerent crowd of ~125 sailors, laborers and artisans could not have been in a life-threatening situation simply because they were the only one's carrying firearms). His narrative at this point possesses that elusive ability to be gripping even though we know how the story ultimately ends. His account of the trials of Preston and the soldiers is also fairly good (though he clear feels they got off too lightly), detailed enough to be intriguing but not so long as to slow down the narrative.
Over all, the book was enjoyable and it felt wonderful to finally read a history book cover-to-cover at a leisurely pace. It's been a long time.
Archer, Richard. As If an Enemy's Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment