The Review of An Analysis of North Carolina in the Revolution and the Civil War Article - Essay Example

Article Review of the Social Order and Violent Disorder: An Analysis of North Carolina in the Revolution and the Civil War Instructor: Date: The authors of the article ‘The Social Order and Violent Disorder: An Analysis of North Carolina in the Revolution and the Civil War’1 generally focus on internal conflicts and civil wars. The article also reflects on the war as well as the cause of the conflict. Much as the article also focuses on the changes that have taken place over time after the war, it shifts its focus on finding out the social plans and forces that led to the same phenomenon. In their paper, Escort and Crow quote Eckstein who tried to argue that earlier authors’ reasons as to why conflicts and internal wars broke out were not substantial and were not adequate too. He claimed that the reasons given such an oppressive government and the rapid social change that took place over the years were not deep enough to explain the internal wars and the way they happened. This article goes an extra mile to explain how the two approaches recommended by Eckstein can be used to explain the complicated reasons for the violence. It explains the two approaches separately as the structural and the behavioral hypotheses. The structural hypotheses explain the general characteristics the society exhibits that can explain the reason for internal war. The behavioral hypotheses on the other hand discuses the society’s perception and studies how the social circumstances were tolerable at a particular place and time, but could not be tolerated somewhere else leading to war. The authors however do not seem to have their points well spelt out. On top of that, the thesis is stated half way into the paper while according to the standard format, the thesis should be at least somewhere at the beginning of the paper so that a reader can have a clear understanding of what the author wants to focus on. In addition, there seems to be several points of focus and not just one particular point that one can point out as the main thesis. Apart from that, the paper does not seem to have a flow as the points appear mixed up and one has to keep jumping bits on the paper in order to understand the points the authors are trying to outline. In their explanations, especially on the hypotheses stated by the quoted author, they focused on one reference, which should not be the case since the author might have a biased view. When explaining such hypotheses, it is always advisable to use more than one author so that one can have several approaches to the same issue and have an unbiased explanation on the particular issue at hand. The facts illustrated in the article do not explain the thesis clearly and hence, it really forces the reader to struggle to get the message in the article. The authors2 have mainly organized this article chronologically since most of the events that they explain are arranged from time to time. Even though the time does not flow systematically, the happenings are clearly dated in the article and this is good since the reader can have a clear picture of when events took place. Apart from the chronological arrangement, one can also categorize the paper as analytical since the authors concentrate so much on details in the paper. Throughout the paper, we can see the authors referring to instances that can be termed minute but ended up contributing to the unrest. For instance, they have taken their time to pinpoint several unsung heroes like David Fanning, Governor Alexander Martin, and even Samuel Finley who might not seem to have played a big role in the unrest since he was only involved in sending copies of the agreement. The authors seem to have combined both the political and social aspect of the unrest in North Carolina. For instance, we see them pointing out that the social relations that were evident in North Carolina played a role in the events that took place in North Carolina. They claim that not only the political aspect ignited both the revolutionary and the civil wars but also the social aspects ignited them too. In the same article, the authors also mention that the governing authority played a role in the war. They argue that the government failed and so played a role in bringing the disaster. This is because many citizens believed that the then leaders were quite inefficient in several areas such as their administration, their triumph in the military as well as in their economy3. Most of the references that the authors have used are relevant and it is clear that these references are dated many years back. Some even go back to the 18th century, as far as the year 1790. The references are quite relevant but the fact that they are outdated dims their relevance since the authors have not well researched on them and have not done much analysis. The best references should have been ones that are more recent since they are well researched and well analyzed with all the past events well spelt out. A great percentage of the authors’ sources are secondary sources and most are outdated and rather irrelevant since the focus is not on the social order and the violent disorder as the title suggests. It is human to be biased and this is evident in this article. Escort and Crow seem to take on the opinion that the class system that existed among the rich, middle class and the poor has in a way a lot to contribute to the social unrest experienced during these times especially when external forces or any of these groups’ members threatened the class order. It is apparent that in isolation, the groups existed in seemingly perfect harmony but this was not true since the groups did harbor feelings of contempt as the conflicts of the Whigs and Tories evidence. Thus, the insistent bias of the authors that the classes contributed to the social disorder may be taken to be based on the literature used but taking a critical look, it would also be noted that the sources used also tended to propagate the same idea. Thus, the authors’ bias may derive from the materials used as references4. The article is very legible and the language used is very clear and easy to understand in a way that a general reader would not find it difficult to read through. The authors have applied a great command of language and they have used English language to express their opinions. This article would benefit scholars since it would give them an idea of the events preceding the war and the war in general. General readers would also benefit by reading it especially if they are not really focused on the details. However, the paper would not really benefit the novices since it is important that they have an insight about the war beforehand in order to give them a better understanding. In their writing, the authors seem to believe that the reader already knows what happened in North Carolina. In fact, they do not even try to give an overview of the war. A novice would not be in a position to understand the paper and it might actually lead to more confusion. The article focuses mainly on the events that led to the war, both social and political, and does not link them to the unrest itself. For instance, it would have been better if the authors actually started with an outline of the war, where and when it took place and relate the facts about the three to give the readers an insight on the genesis of the war. Apart from that, it would have been of dire importance for the authors to outline the facts that were later released pertaining the war such as the number of people it affected and how. Furthermore, in such a paper, it is essential for one to point out the effects of the war both economically and socially. Further research would have been of great significance in order to at least give figures of how many were injured and even the number of people who died. Reference Escott, P. D. & Crow, J. J. “The Social Order and Violent Disorder: An Analysis of North Carolina in the Revolution and the Civil War”. The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 52, No. 3. (August, 1986): 373-402. Read More