Abstract
For purposes of review it is fruitful to examine Gary B. Nash's The Urban Crucible as if it were two books. One is a complex, largely descriptive study of the social, economic, and political history of the key port cities of colonial America--Boston, New York, and Philadelphia--from 1690 to 1776. The other, drawing its energy from the rich detail of the first, is an evolutionary study of the socio-economic origins of the American Revolution. The two are woven together by material, focus, and theme: usually neglected materials, such as wills, inventories of estates, tax rolls, poor relief lists, voting records, shipping logs, and records of construction starts are imaginatively used; the focus is on the 'lower orders' of colonial urban society; and emphasis is placed upon the theme of modernity. This is rendered as a fitful but clear movement in urban society in three possible directions: from corporatism to laissez-faire, from traditional, kinship, deferential society to acquisitive, atomistic, democratic society, or (in an ironic echo of Perry Miller) a declension from organic community to mechanistic, individualistic society. The 'first' book represents a much needed departure from the myriad town and regional studies which for more than a decade have dotted the historiography of early America. For although Nash scrupulously preserves the integrity of each city--making clear, for example, both that ethnic rivalries in Philadelphia were very different from political rivalries in New York and religious
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have