How can we avoid an inappropriate Eurocentris when dealing with a phase of world history in which Europeans were in fact central?
First, is simply to remind ourselves how recent and perhaps how brief the European moment in world history has been. Second, we need to remember that the rise of Europe occurred within an international context. It was the withdrawal of the Chinese naval fleet that allowed Europeans to dominate the Indian Ocean in the sixteenth century, while Native Americans’ lack of immunity to European diseases and their own division and conflicts greatly assisted the European takeover. Third, the rise of Europe to a position of global dominance was not an easy or automatic process. Frequently it occurred in the face of ferocious resistance and rebellion, which often required Europeans to modify their policies and practices. Fourth, Peoples the world over made active use of Europeans and European ideas for their own purposes, seeking to gain advantage over local rivals or to benefit themselves in light of new conditions. Fifth and final, antidote to Eurocentrism in an age of European centrality lies in the recognition that although Europeans gained an unprecedented prominence on the world stage, they were not the only game in town, nor were they the sole preoccupation of Asian, African, and Middle Eastern people.
Atlantic Revolutions and Their Echoes
The various revolutions in North America, France, Haiti, and Latin America were clearly influenced by each other and triggered similar revolutions in other parts of the world in centuries to come. These revolutions shared a set of common ideas that were derived from the European Enlightenment and were communicated across the ocean through newspapers, books and pamphlet. At the heart of these ideas was the notion that human political and social status can be engineered and improved through human actions. The conventional and established way of living – the divine right of the kings, state control of trade, the authority of a single church – was losing grounds and the new ideas of liberty, equality, free trade, religious tolerance and others were taking over. Politically, the core notion was “popular sovereignty”, which means that the authority of the state is derived from the people rather than from God.
The American Revolution was launched with the declaration of independence in 1776, resulted in an unlikely military victory in 1781, and generated a federal constitution in 1787, joining thirteen states in one nation. The revolution was a movement to preserve the existing liberties that the colonies had enjoyed rather than creating new ones. For much of the 17th and 18th centuries, the British colonies in North America enjoyed a great degree of local autonomy. The colonies were governed by assemblies of elected individuals, mostly of wealthy families. The availability of land, the scarcity of people, and the absence of an established church meant that social life was very open. Because of such freedom, almost no one in the colonies thought of breaking from England since much economic and social values came from England. Thus, the American Revolution did not grow out of social tensions within the colonies, but from a quick and unexpected effort by the British government to tighten its control over the colonies and extract more revenue from them in the form of taxes and tariffs that the American Revolution started. They Americans went to war armed with the ideas of popular sovereignty, natural rights, and consent of the governed. Many historians argue that the society that emerged after the revolution was a society that had existed for a long time and not a direct product of the revolution.
The French revolution began in 1989 after thousands of French soldiers, who had provided assistance to the American Revolution, returned home full of republican enthusiasm. At that time, the French government was in the brink of bankruptcy. The French revolution was quite different from its North American predecessor. Whereas the American Revolution expressed the tension with a colonial relationship with a distant imperial power, the French Revolution was driven by conflicts within French society. All classes had their own resentment to the monarchical power: the nobles resented and resisted the new taxes, the growing middle class groups were offended from being excluded from the privileged class, the ordinary urban residents saw their wealth decline by increasing prices, the peasants were increasingly subject to dues and landlords. These social conflicts gave the French Revolution a much more violent, far-reaching and radical character than its American counterpart. In early 1793, King Louis XVI and his queen were executed, an act of regicide that shocked Europe and marked a new stage in revolutionary violence.
The impact of the revolution was felt in many ways: streets got new names, people referred to each other as “citizen so-and-so”, many people joined political clubs and politics became a public affair, common citizens began to think of them as belonging to a nation and the state replaced the church in conducting civil administration.
The French Revolution differs from the American Revolution in the way its influence spread. Until the end of the 19th century, the influence of the American Revolution came from people’s admiration to its constitution, the French Revolution, on the other hand, spread through conquest, largely under the leadership of Napoleon Bonaparte.
The French Revolution made a quick and great influence on the French Caribbean colony of Saint Domingue, later named Haiti, which was regarded as the richest colony in the world. It produces 40% of the world sugar and half of its coffee. The social structure in Haiti was extremely unequal and therefore was primed for explosion. The slaves numbered around 500,000, while the white masters were about 40,000. In such a volatile setting, the ideas and example of the French Revolution lit several fuses and set in motion a spiral of violence that engulfed the colony for more than a decade.
The revolution had remarkable and unprecedented impacts. Socially, this was the only successful slave revolt in the world. Politically, by thrown off French colonial rule, it became the second independent republic in America and the first non-European state to emerge from Western colonialism. This revolution inspired other slave uprisings. Unfortunately, the destructiveness of the Haitian Revolution: its bitter division of race, color and class; and continuing external opposition contributed much to Haiti abiding poverty and instability.
The final act in a half century of Atlantic revolutionary upheaval took place in the Spanish and Portuguese colonies of mainland Latin America. These revolutions differed from the North American and Haitian revolutions in many aspects. The settlers in the Spanish colonies had little tradition of local self-government that had developed in North America. The revolutionary process lasted more than twice as long as it did in North America, partly because Latin American societies were so conflicted and divided by race, class and region. So, the entire independence movement in Latin America took place under the shadow of fear of social rebellion from below. The great violence of the French and Haitian revolutions taught the Latin American elites that political change can easily result in uncontrolled fights. The significant social and regional differences explain the failure of Latin Americans to unit a single country like what happened in North America.
In a little more than a century from 1780 to 1890, slavery lost its legitimacy and was largely ended. In this amazing process, the ideas and practices of the Atlantic revolutions played an important role. The Enlightenment thinkers in the 18th century had become very critical of slavery and wrote frequently against its legitimacy. Also, the revolt of slaves in Haiti and the other similar revolts showed that slaves were willing to take actions to elevate the oppression.
The Atlantic revolutions also gave rise to new prominence to a relatively new kind of human community – the nation. By the end of the 20th century, the idea that humankind was divided into separate nations, each with a distinct culture and territory and deserving independent political life, was very widespread. This idea was very new as human usually formed their identity around local identities such as clan, village or region. This typical loyalty framework began to change during the era of Atlantic revolutions.
Nationalism proved to be a very flexible and powerful idea in the 19th century. It inspired the political unification of both Germany and Italy. It encouraged Greeks and Serbs to gain their independence from the Ottoman Empire, and many others followed. Moreover, governments throughout the Western world claimed to act on behalf of their nations and deliberately tried to instill national loyalties in their citizens.
Thinkers and European Enlightenment had challenged many ancient traditions like women’s intrinsic inferiority. The French revolution raised the possibility of re-creating human societies on new foundations. Many women participated in its events and some insisted that the revolution ideas of liberty and equality must include women. Like nationalism, a concern with women’s rights spread beyond Western Europe and the United States.