1776 by David McCullough - Book Report/Review Example

The 4th of July, Independence Day, December 7th, 1941, a day which will live infamy, September 11th-these s are iconic and etched on the historical consciousness of Americans. Dates have a way of reifying a moment to be remembered by the rest of history. There is likely no single year has a greater capacity to pull on the American imagination than that of 1776. David McCullough in his narrative historical account attempts to lucidly recreate the crucible of revolution fostered during those trying times, which is elegantly and simply titled, 1776. McCullough a renowned popular historian utilizes as many techniques of hard academic scholarship as he does novelistic and entertaining ones in order to radiate history to the masses. The events of 1776 are well-rehearsed in high school American social studies classes around the country, but what is often left out is the social and cultural context in which many of these events occurred. Pedagogically, much of history as currently taught in our secondary education system is the history of great men in great battles subsequently signing important treaties. McCullough, while his narrative is tightly focused on the trials and tribulations of Washington's Continental Army, seeks to broaden his methodological perspective and focus less exclusively on maps and troop movements and instead fill in the details and sharpen our understanding of what is happening on the periphery of this war. He does so not by focusing on the revolutionary aspects of the American Revolution but what made that revolution so American. Moreover, it is these lessons about America that going forward we can try to refine our perception of the United States and attempt to make better sense of its past, present and future. In this vein, this essay will attempt to elucidate a specific theme that is present, or more correctly that is thematically absent in 1776, which seems especially relevant in today's contentious political climate; it is the role of religion in politics and the nature of religious practices in the colonies. In the book, 1776, the word "Christian" is never mentioned nor any variant and the word "religion" is mentioned exactly once, and that in a letter by Nathanael Green, a militia private who rose to the rank of major general in Washington's army, to Samuel Ward, colonial governor of Rhode Island. He wrote, "America must raise an empire of permanent duration, supported by the grand pillars of Truth, Freedom and Religion, encouraged by the smiles of Justice and defended by her own patriotic sons" (McCullough 68). It is worth observing similarities and dissimilarities between this ideological tripartite and another that would become the rallying cry of a revolution that would transform France some 13 years later, "Liberte, Equalite, Fraternite." Enlightenment thinking held the attention of many leaders during the American Revolution, as many of the framers were introduced to philosophy and political science in their studies in such places as Harvard College and William & Mary. Adam Smith's classic text The Wealth of Nations was published in 1776 and so thoughts of liberty and its many manifestations were very much in the spirit of the times. Religion and the appraisal of its role during colonial times is a much debated topic among contemporary "users of history." Some wish to point out that the initial settlers, seeking escape from religious persecution, is what underlies the deeply religious and spiritual foundations of this country. Some also point to the Judeo-Christian principles self-evident in the writing of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. This "self-evidency" is elicited to confirm that the United States, in its current state, is to some degree or all degrees a debauched and morally bankrupt society, which has slid into apostasy from its former austere and upright self. Others conversely protest that in fact that many of the framers of those essential documents, and many other individuals in the colonies did not wear their religious affiliations like badges of honor nor did they seek to impose some unduly moralistic Christian code on their fellow patriots. In fact, they counterclaim that some like Benjamin Franklin (though later he seemed to backtrack from his original criticisms) and Thomas Paine were highly critical of religion and that the newly born country should be freed from this detrimental force. 1776 is somewhat quiescent and relatively quiet as to the manifestations of religious debate and sentiment, and this ambivalence speaks volumes. In a report, a journalist for the New York Packet writes about the comportment of the troops that were quartered throughout the city, "They [Yankee soldiers] attended prayers 'evening and morning regularly' their officers setting the example" (McCullough 123). It also goes on to note that their comportment in a house of God was appropriate as befitted the scene. Initially, this is all seemingly indicative of highly regulated, exceptionally religious Continental Army, ostensibly indicative of the times. Yet McCullough includes a description of the behavior of the troops given by a young Presbyterian minister, who found the level of piety alarmingly low and was disconcerted by the ubiquity among all the ranks of taking the Lord's name in vein. The minister laments, "But alas swearing abounds, all classes swear" (McCullough 123). Finally, a lieutenant walking around the city with some twenty church denominations to choose from, went to as many as possible before settling on the Dutch one, which was near as he noted the city's one synagogue, Shearith Israel, on Mill Street. These anecdotes reveal that relatively high church attendance even among the often jaded and occasionally crude military segments of society did not necessarily equate to piety or religious obsession among the colonies in general. Nor does the wide-range of denominational choices available and practiced in the urbanized areas of the time, Boston, New York and Philadelphia imply a sort of egalitarian and tolerant approach towards religion throughout the colonial populations either. Sailors still cursed and the Lord's Day was most definitely Sunday. However, what it does suggest is that the current demonstrations among politicians on both sides of the aisle of chronic and boosterish rhetoric with regards to religion and specifically Christianity are not necessarily borne out of some kind of golden spiritual age that was the colonial US. Finally, the interplay between religion and politics was not the three-ring circus which has occupied many of the past elections. McCullough, despite the title of his book, spends very little time discussing the Declaration of Independence or the theoretical machinery that went into its framing. When McCullough does include references to virtue, spirit and faith they are often in reference to civic virtue, the spirit of perseverance and the faith that soldiers and politicians had in George Washington and vice-versa. These principles were not focused or framed as a mission from God, though most would admit at the time without His Blessing that this venture would not be successful, but were focused around the desire of sovereignty from Crown and Parliament. The enemy in the American Revolution was not an "evil" empire, but specifically George III and Lord North. In orders that George Washington issued to his troops before his first victory at Dorchester Heights on March 5th, 1776 the six-anniversary of the Boston Massacre, he assures them that "it is a noble cause we are engaged in, it is the cause of virtue and mankind, every temporal advantage and comfort to us and our posterity depends on the vigor of our exertions" (McCullough 91). It is a gambit of virtue and mankind that Washington is playing here; it is the vigor of our exertions and not the strength of our faith in God which will rule the day. The American Revolution in the eyes of the framers and of the military leadership was not a Crusade; it was a bid for freedom and independence. Washington's rhetoric in many instances lacks the religious zeal of many of our current politicians, but it should not be assumed that Washington was not sensitive to these issues altogether, in his farewell address he offers that in the service of political prosperity, "religion and morality are indispendable [sic] supports" (Washington). He goes on to question whether or not the sanctity and security of such institutions as property and life in general can be maintained in the absence of religious obligation or whether oaths, the "instruments of investigation" for courts, can exist without religion. Finally, he cautions against indulging "in the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion" (Washington). It might be suggested at this juncture that the role of religion is presented here as genuinely inseparable from the state, and that Washington's final remarks to the nation which he helped to found clearly imply this integral connection. Moreover, any terminological equivocation about what Washington means by religion, i.e. whether he means Christianity or not, is non sequitur and anachronistic given the time period and audience. This is a very plausible and reasonable conclusion, but it must be maintained that Washington's comments are carefully worded in this regard insofar that religion supports and serves morality, rather than dominating and controlling it. The role of religion in politics and government is undeniably present, and as 1776 has shown perhaps it has always been present. Yet, what has not been present since 1776 is this cacophonous refrain of religious rhetoric that has monopolized the political discourse over the past few years. If we are to learn anything from McCullough's stirring narrative is that America has operated most efficiently and most successfully when its ideological commitments are harmonized with its practical concerns and neither is totally sacrificed to the other. Works Cited McCullough, David. 1776. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2005. Washington, George. "Washington's Farewell Address to the People of the United States: Senate Document 106-21." 2000. US Government Printing Office. 106th Congress. 1 March 2008 . Read More