The Legendary And Myth Making Process In Histories Of The American Revolution

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Excerpt from The Legendary and Myth-Making Process in Histories of the American Revolution This history of the Revolution from the whig point of view was written almost as rapidly as the events occurred, not only in the whig speeches, but in the Annual Register, an important publication of that time, still in existence, which summed up the political and diplomatic occurrences of the year both at home and abroad as they affected England. After the Revolution was ended and people began to think of writing an account of it, they found that it was the easiest thing in the world to do. Just get down the volumes of the Annual Register and there it all was for each of the seventeen years of the long controversy; each year by itself clearly and co gently written; for the Annual Register had employed the great whig orator Edmund Burke to write these summaries every year. Burke was very careful with his dates, facts and statements so far as he chose to go and the Register enjoyed a high reputation in that respect. But the statements were all whig statements; no others were admitted; no facts unfavorable to the whig line of policy were admitted; and every fact and statement was given the tinge and leaning of the whig policy. Those summaries running for seventeen years in the Register and the speeches of the whig orators were the material that the early historians of the Revolution used. Gordon, who wrote the first important and widely read history of the Revolution, copied page after page of the Register verbatim and says so in his preface to the first English edition. Those whig speeches and summaries gave the tone, the point of View and the limitations, and fixed them so rigidly that the great mass of evidence outside of those limita tions has always been rejected; and when now obtruded on the pub lic in even the mildest form, is received with staring and sometimes indignant incredulity. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.

First published ten years ago, award-winning historian Ray Raphael's Founding Myths has since established itself as a landmark of historical myth-busting. With Raphael's trademark wit and flair, Founding Myths exposed the errors and inventions in America's most cherished tales, from Paul Revere's famous ride to Patrick Henry's "Liberty or Death" speech. For the thousands who have been captivated by Raphael's eye-opening accounts, history has never been the same. In this revised tenth-anniversary edition, Raphael revisits the original myths and further explores their evolution over time, uncovering new stories and peeling back new layers of misinformation. This new edition also examines the highly politicized debates over America's past, as well as how our approach to history in school reinforces rather than corrects historical mistakes. A book that "explores the truth behind the stories of the making of our nation" (National Public Radio), this revised edition of Founding Myths will be a welcome resource for anyone seeking to separate historical fact from fiction.

Tradition, Conflict, and Modernization: Perspectives on the American Revolution aims to expand knowledge on the intellectual character of the Revolution, its relation to the trend of modernization, and its standing as a manifestation of social conflict. The book discusses the American revolution in national tradition; the collective action in England and America in 1765-1775, and back country rebellions and the homestead ethic in America in 1740-1799. The text also describes the perspective of modernization related to the American revolution, modernization, and human. Historians will find the book invaluable.

The chief objective of this text is to provide a handy reference guide for teachers, students and researchers of modern European economic and social history. Since the bibliography covers only works written in the English language it will probably be of less use to the last named group, at least insofar as those within it are already seasoned researchers on a particular country or topic. However, it would have been quite impossible from the point of view of length to have included all the literature in foreign languages, while to have done so would have defeated the essential aim of the volume, namely that of providing a reasonably convenient guide for those who teach and study the subject but who are not primarily specialists in the field.