Objections to duties like the Stamp Act sounded less in general incapacity than particular overreach: of course Parliament could impose taxes on the colonies, just not these particular taxes (p. Initially, in line with whig celebrations of Parliament, North Atlantic colonists recognized Westminster’s right to tax colonial possessions. As every student of American history knows, the British imposition of taxes on the North American colonies in the second half of the eighteenth century did not go over smoothly. The standard account goes astray, Nelson believes, when it gets to the imperial crisis. The traditional narrative correctly claims that the colonists were, initially at least, on guard against further centralization of government authority or expansions of royal prerogative. Accordingly, they believed that the British king had corrupted the ancient constitution by arrogating to himself Parliament’s powers. He agrees with the standard account that, before the late 1760s, North Atlantic colonists tended to adopt a “Country whig” understanding of the British Empire's history (p. Nelson does not reject the received story completely. Far from being antimonarchist, Nelson claims, key revolutionary figures were arch-Stuart reactionaries. Most of us are taught that the American Republic was born in a revolt against monarchism. The Royalist Revolution is so unsettling because its claim is so bold. How, exactly, should this book be received? Nelson’s book thus raises some distinctive questions for the legal academy and the historians based there. The story it sets up in its place gives a historical grounding to conservative legal positions many liberal law professors oppose. Nelson’s revisionist account takes aim at the central intellectual story of the American Revolution, the “Republican Synthesis.” So doing, it strikes at the foundation of much original work in law and history of the past thirty years. The brouhaha has yet to come to law schools, but when it does, it will be bigger. A few allege that he has misconstrued his evidence. Others that it is all novel, because nearly fictional. Some, in frustration, have claimed it has nothing new in it. Of Kingship and Counselors: The Royalist Revolution in Legal HistoryĮric Nelson has written a book that has made a lot of people mad. The Royalist Revolution: Monarchy and the American Founding.Ĭambridge: Harvard University Press, 2014.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |