In the spring of 1676; Nathaniel Bacon; a hotheaded young newcomer to Virginia; led a revolt against the colony's Indian policies. Bacon's Rebellion turned into a civil war within Virginia--and a war of extermination against the colony's Indian allies--that lasted into the following winter; sending shock waves throughout the British colonies and into England itself. James Rice offers a colorfully detailed account of the rebellion; revealing how Piscataways; English planters; slave traders; Susquehannocks; colonial officials; plunderers and intriguers were all pulled into an escalating conflict whose outcome; month by month; remained uncertain. In Rice's rich narrative; the lead characters come to life: the powerful; charismatic Governor Berkeley; the sorrowful Susquehannock warrior Monges; the wiley Indian trader and tobacco planter William Byrd; the regal Pamunkey chieftain Cockacoeske; and the rebel leader himself; Nathaniel Bacon. The dark; slender Bacon; born into a prominent family; soon earned a reputation in America as imperious; ambitious; and arrogant. But the colonial leaders did not foresee how rash and headstrong Nathaniel Bacon could be; nor how adept he would prove to be at both inciting colonists and alienating Indians. As the tense drama unfolds; it becomes apparent that the struggle between Governor Berkeley and the impetuous Bacon is nothing less than a battle over the soul of America. Bacon died in the midst of the uprising and Governor Berkeley shortly afterwards; but the profoundly important issues at the heart of the rebellion took another generation to resolve.The late seventeenth century was a pivotal moment in American history; full of upheavals and far-flung conspiracies. Tales From a Revolution brilliantly captures the swirling rumors and central events of Bacon's Rebellion and its aftermath; weaving them into a dramatic tale that is part of the founding story of America.
#890007 in Books Max M Edling 2008-07-08Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 6.10 x .80 x 9.10l; 1.01 #File Name: 0195374169336 pagesA Revolution in Favor of Government Origins of the U S Constitution and the Making of the American State
Review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Corrects misinterpretations of the developmental trajectory of the Founding Era by using comparative historical analysis.By Keith FitzgeraldThis book is tightly argued and well structured. It counters the inward looking view of the Federalists which sees them as setting of a limited and weak state. Their project was subtle and it was only fully realized with the adoption of the 14th Amendment; they successfully created a stealthy; strong state at least with respect to foreign relations and fiscal policy.Edling's discussions of the Federalists' fiscal policies especially illuminate their success. Contrary to the fantasies of latter day budget hawks; the ability of the federal government to assume state debts; manage currency and the effectiveness at repayment; allowed the US to run large but well financed deficits from the beginning much to the benefit of future generations6 of 13 people found the following review helpful. Why we have a ConstitutionBy Bernard R. LevineI just read this remarkable (and slim) book. Then I read it again.Most Oxford University Press books are slanted to the left of Lenin. I do not know how this one slipped through. Perhaps it was the deceptive title; which might lead one to mistake it for a statist tract. It is nothing of the sort.Edling is a young man from Sweden -- which is not the same as the proverbial "man from Mars;" but is close enough when it comes to viewing the United States from an outsider's perspective. Edling looks at America of the 1780s without the distractions of America now (or in between).Edling's central thesis is that the essential debate between the Federalists and the anti-Federalists during the Ratification debate was on this question:Would the newly drafted Constitution succeed in keeping (small d) democrats out of the national government?The Convention had already abandoned the state governments to the (small d) democrats; which is why the definitions of citizenship and the franchise were left to each individual state; and are barely mentioned in the Constitution.Both sides in the Ratification debate; says Edling; agreed that this was the only area left unresolved; the only debate that really mattered.The Federalists said their Constitution would do the job.The anti-Federalists said it would fail.Both sides agreed that keeping (small d) democrats out of the national government was a worthy goal; indeed the ONLY reason for having a Constitution at all: to prevent the Republic from becoming a Democracy; and thence inevitably a Tyranny.Ultimately they reached a compromise; unsatisfactory to both.This compromise was the Bill of Rights; Amendments I-X.The Federalists said this Bill was unnecessary; and showed too little faith in the Constitution.The anti-Federalists said this Bill was not nearly enough; but better than nothing. They had no faith in the Legislative Branch; asserted that under the Constitution; the Legislature would still be as reckless; feckless; and corrupt as the Continental Congress; and as that Ancient Cesspit over in Westminster; the British Parliament.The anti-Federalists proved correct in their prognosis.Alas they had no satisfactory prescription.Thomas Jefferson; who did more than anyone to bring (small d) democrats into the national government; lived long enough to regret his folly -- and to regret that when he had the chance; he failed to hang his vice president; Aaron Burr; for insurrection and treason (Burr had been co-founder with George Clinton of the Democratic Party in New York).* * * *I had never understood the meaning of Alexander Hamilton's "funded debt;" copied from the English "consols". Neither did Jefferson. Neither does anyone opining in the media today; from Left or Right or out in Space.Thanks to young Mr Edling; now I get it.The funded debt is not just about "deficit financing." That is a red herring.It is about private savers and investors funding national government operations (which in the 1780s meant defense and war; nothing else); while annual taxes paid only the annual interest on that obligation -- with FULL understanding on all sides that the PRINCIPAL would NEVER be repaid; but that the interest would always be paid; paid on time and in hard money. This guarantee would make government bonds the safest savings vehicle available; and make them totally liquid despite never being redeemed; because there was always a strong secondary market for interest bearing bonds underwritten by the full faith and credit of the government.This is how our funded debt continues to work; despite the irrelevant rhetoric and total misunderstandings on all sides; and even despite the abolition of hard currency. This is why foreigners remain happy to own American debt; a fact that puzzles even the sages at the Wall Street Journal.Anyone who uses the word "deficit" does not understand how funded debt works. There is no deficit. There is only the annual interest cost of the debt; versus annual federal revenue. As long as the revenue is sufficient to pay the interest; and as long as paying that interest remains the first financial obligation of the government; its bonds remain sound.Similarly; anyone who imagines there can be an imbalance of trade does not understand trade. Any seeming imbalance in trade flow is balanced by money flow; and that money can be used for anything; but particularly for purchasing government bonds; and collecting the interest on them. The only effect of an imbalance of trade is an increase in the proportion of government debt held by foreigners.Thank you Mr. Edling!1 of 5 people found the following review helpful. Bought as a gift for sonBy Tim HarrisonBought as a gift for son; He said he liked it.
