Gary B.

Nash, 'Sparks from the Altar of '76: International Repercussions and

Reconsiderations of the American Revolution, c. 1760-1840', in The Age of
Revolution in Global Context, c. 1760-1840, edited by David Armitage and Sanjay
Subrahmanyam. Palgrave Macmillan: London 2010, pp. 1-19.
The article Sparks from the Altar of 76: International Repercussions and
Reconsiderations of the American Revolution, by Gary B. Nash, published in 2010,
questions the international influence of the American Revolution with regards to the
spread of revolutionary ideas of liberty and equality. It begins by questioning existing
historical views on the American Revolution, which perceive America postRevolution as an inspirational model for subsequent revolutionary movements. Nash
takes an opposing view, believing that historians have overstated its global impact on
the concept of empire, and questions a key ideology of the Revolution: namely, how
the universal right of liberty could coexist with the institution of slavery. Nash argues
that it was the conscious suppression of the dispersion of revolutionary ideas by
Americans - who feared the spread of these ideas to slave societies - that limited the
international impact of the Revolution. The article then examines the feelings and
actions surrounding slavery and abolition of four important figures of the time. The
first figure, Richard Price, a British politician who saw an inherent contradiction in
the American revolutionaries proclaiming freedom for all while keeping slaves, is
used as an example of the international abolitionist movement. He is contrasted with
Benjamin Franklin, an American slave-owner, whose transition from slave-owner to
ardent anti-slaver is attributed to his interactions with Enlightened individuals, and
evidence disproving the inherent inferiority of African-Americans. The article then
examines George Washington, later the first American president, attributing his antislavery to his interactions with black soldiers, and his friendship with Lafayette, a
Frenchman strongly committed to abolition. Ultimately, Nash is critical of
Washingtons failure to act on his qualms about slavery until after his death, given his
influential position in American politics. Similarly, the author criticises Thomas
Jefferson, an influential slave-owner, for being anti-slavery yet believing in inherent
black inferiority, and for failing to personally act to end slavery despite his opinions
of black persons becoming more positive over time. In summary, Nash identifies
post-Revolutionary America as a disappointing vision of universal freedom, and
criticises the hypocrisy inherent in a slave-owning republic of liberty.
As suggested by its title, this article addresses the American Revolution within a
global context, and considering the society of the time, a necessarily imperial context.
There is little direct reference to colonisation; however, the article does examine the
issue of slavery and abolition in America, and hence also the repercussion of any
actions related to emancipation on other imperial, colonial powers and their colonies.
The article also discusses power in a number of ways: the power disparity between
colonisers and slaves, and hence the consequences of abolition; the actions, or lack
thereof, of those with the power to change society; and how racial equality conflicted
with ideas of white superiority and power.
This article has provided a good base for understanding the American Revolution
from a modern viewpoint, containing both an examination on a grand, global scale,
and a more focused analysis of important political figures. However, perhaps due to
Nash's contemporary viewpoint, the article does seem harshly critical of the three

Founding Fathers discussed, and presents their views on slavery as sordid secrets with
the power to tarnish reputations.