Urban+History+Presentation+Page



Rebels Rising

Hit the edit button and then you can add or delete text or other stuff on this page. We can add images etc. and access them together or apart. In order to use this page you must register as a wiki user and then hit the "join this space" button. Once you have done that you will be able to make any changes you want Rebels Rising is a detailed examination of the American Revolution through an Urban History lens. Moving from the waterfront in Boston, to the taverns and social clubs of New York City, to the churches and pews of Newport, Rhode Island he concludes with visits to the homes and domestic spaces within Charleston and the public areas of Philadelphia. In each city he delves deeply into the spaces where people communicated and interacted helping to pave the way for revolution. Each community’s unique revolutionary experience was shaped by the cityscape of which it was composed. .

Benjamin Carp’s book “Rebel Rising: Cities and the American Revolution” chronicles the decades before the Revolution through the eyes of American cities. In fact, each city he writes about, in one form or the other, added fuel to the Revolution’s fire. Boston, with its waterfront, was a “crucial and catalytic component of the urban revolution…and of the American Revolution as a whole.” (61) Like all seaports, Boston had viewed the oncoming conflict through a different lens than most because of the implications (The first to be attacked and the threat of being burned to the ground.) The waterfront served as the grounds with which the Revolution took flight in Boston. New York, had its own mode of supporting and sharing ideas about the Revolution and that was through its taverns. Carp points out that “Subjects of the eighteenth-century British Empire increasingly saw their society as a loose collection of voluntary societies.” (77) This is probably the biggest reason why one fourth of white male New Yorkers belonged to a social club. (76) While drinking was a large part of their functions, the atmosphere of self-reliant men (with a couple of beers in them already) would probably found acceptance in showing their distaste for the Crown on the other side of the Atlantic. Newport on the other hand, while politically active, couldn’t formulate a cohesive Loyalist or Patriot movement. Religion, mostly Protestantism, was a major factor in the lives of Newport’s citizens. Carp dedicates pages 101-112 to illustrate this point. From Congregationalists to Baptist to Jews, the whole gambit is explored. Carp did concede, though, that there were some in Newport that did cooperate. Citing Jews sponsoring building of different denominations (118) and attempts at inclusion by most denominations (111), he does acknowledge an attempt at inclusion. However, Carp said it summarizes the situation clearly. “Religion was bad for politics.” (118) People simply could not get over the rivalries that had developed over the years and distrusted most outside of their own congregations. Riverfront houses dominated the culture of Charlestown. One could argue that houses alone could were the single most shared experience of Americans because most viewed “the Revolution from the vantage point of their household.”(143) The idea of houses having a similar function as churches in that they provide security and announce who you are to visitors. Lastly, Philadelphia carried the most weight of the dissenters. It is one thing to say you want to break from Britain but it is an entirely different matter when you are actually meeting in legislative sessions discussing the matter. Carp doesn’t just mean formal meetings. He includes pamphlets, parades, riots, anything printed and just a feeling in the atmosphere of Philadelphia that separated it from its counterparts. (174) Carp sums up Philadelphia’s influence on the matter of Revolution by quoting Jeff Reed “…the eyes of all America are upon this city, and at this time the transactions of the Congress are indeed very important to the whole British Empire.” (201) Carp sums up his findings by pointing out that the cities' political activism was exactly the reason they came to prominence and vice versa. (213)

Questions:

1.) Background/acknowledgments/previous writings Benjamin Carp’s faculty page at Tuft’s refers to a wide variety of interests. How is this reflected in the arguments and organization of his book? What are some of those interests and how are they reflected in other publications and reviews written by Carp. Even on his web page, http://ase.tufts.edu/history/faculty/carp.asp, his argument is that the cities of the American Revolution were robbed of their importance. 2.) Actual book and book reviews

3.) In a review by John K. Alexander in the March 2009 **Journal of American History** of Benjamin Carp’s //Rebels Rising// he states: “//Rebels Rising// … is an example of what might be called the inclusive cultural school, which insists that scholars consider all members of society and the cultural milieu in which they lived”

Evaluate that assessment in the context of one the cities Carp examines.

4.) How is the argument structured? Benjamin Carp focuses on five separate cities in his book. In each city he uses a different conception of space or “city scape quote here” examine the roots of revolutionary mobilization. Which city and method presents the most compelling and comprehensive case. Which do think fell short in comparison to the others?

5.) How was the research conducted? Carp uses a variety sources in each of his chapters. What are some of the most insightful and compelling examples from the book? Which chapter’s source’s seemed weakest or speculative in nature? An early 20th century work called Cities in the Wilderness by Carl Bridenbaugh seems to have some key elements in common with Carp's later work. Evaluate what some of these similarities and differences are after examining some pages from this earlier offering.

6.) What is this work in the context of Urban History?

1. According to what you have read and what you have learned in prior courses, do you think that urban history of the American Revolution has been overlooked? Explain.

How does this book counteract typical thoughts and opinions about cities and their importance to United States history?

Is it surprising that cities were the focal point for revolution?

Why were the cities often more conducive to the radical’s movements rather than the countermobiliaztion of loyalists?

What makes social interactions and the formation of a collective identity such an important theme throughout the book?

How does this book reiterate the importance of Boston Harbor, about which we first read last week, in Michael Rawson’s article? Though a century and a half later, does the tourism movement in New York City reflect any of the developments experience in the city during the build up to the Revolutionary War?

Carp concludes that knowledge and memory of the importance of cities in regard the Revolutionary War is lost, do you agree? Do modern cities still hold some of the same keys necessary for radical development and change?

How does the layout and style of the book affect the delivery of the information? Does the presentation method of individual case studies work or should the author have integrated the information together?

While he completed an extensive amount of research and pulled from a large number of sources, is the information overwhelming? Or is it enlightening? What do the appendices and the images throughout add to the book?

Does the fact that this is a dissertation make the book any less suspect of “having an agenda?” Who are the people giving the author rave reviews on the back cover and should we listen to them?