Post on 06-Apr-2018
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
1/22
BACONS REBELLION:MERE INSURRECTIONOR ABORTIVEREVOLUTION?
BY MICHAEL SCHEARER
RESEARCHAND WRITING SKILLS
DR. GENTILE-FORD
FINAL PAPER
DECEMBER 10, 1996
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
2/22
Schearer 2
Students of history often think of the American Revolution
in terms of the causes of the outbreak of war in 1775: the
Stamp, Sugar and Quartering Acts, the Boston Tea party, and the
Intolerable Acts of 1774. The ideas of oppressive taxation,
taxation without representation, restraints on trade and limited
freedoms, all factors which precipitated important political
reforms, were surely on the minds of colonial revolutionaries at
the time.
However, a small but heated debate has transpired over a
series of events that took place in 1676 referred to as Bacons
Rebellion. Taking its name from its leader Nathaniel Bacon, the
rebellion is usually considered the first popular uprising of
organized resistance in colonial America. The debate continues
over whether Bacons Rebellion had democratic aims or was simply
an illegal attempt to seize land and power in Virginia. Quite
possibly, the American Revolution may not have started in
Concord and Lexington in 1775, but almost one hundred years
earlier in Virginia, by Nathaniel Bacon. The political reforms
of Bacons Rebellion, as those of the American Revolution, layed
the groundwork for democracy.
In 1767 in the English colony of Virginia, violence erupted
between planters and frontier Indians. The violence claimed the
lives of numerous colonists and Indians. Nathaniel Bacon
assumed leadership against the Indians because it appeared as if
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
3/22
Schearer 3
Governor William Berkeley was unwilling to provide safety for
the colonists. Bacons unauthorized Indian campaign had begun.
His main targets were the Occaneechees and the Pamunkeys.
Governor Berkeley then raised a force against Bacon, who
swiftly pushed Berkeley out of Jamestown (capital of Virginia)
to Accomack, across the Chesapeake. On May 10, Bacon was
proclaimed a rebel by Berkeley for his unauthorized violence
against the Indians.
In the midst of the rebellion (June 5 to 25), the House of
Burgesses met at Jamestown at passed a series of political
reforms and corrected perceived abuses in the colonial and
county governments. During this period Bacon was captured, but
begged for a pardon and commission. Berkeley promised both, but
reneged on the commission until Bacon returned with a force of
six hundred armed men. Berkeley bared his chest and invited
Bacon to shoot him, assuming Bacon had come for his life. But
Bacon did no such thing, and marched off in search of the
Indians after receiving his commission.
Soon after leaving Jamestown, Bacon was again declared a
rebel. During the next few months, Bacon fought Berkeley for
control of Virginia. By September 19 Bacon had returned to
Jamestown, and captured and burned it. Within six weeks Bacon
passed away, leaving the rebellion with no charismatic leader as
Bacon had been. The rebellion was essentially over.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
4/22
Schearer 4
Historians have been torn over the true meaning of the
events that took place during the summer of 1676. Some have
interpreted Bacons Rebellion as a revolt against tyranny with
democratic intentions. Others believe Bacons actions were a
lawless attempt to expand private property at the expense of the
Secondary sources on Bacons Rebellion are relatively rare.
Some secondary materials help to mirror the division that has
emerged over the interpretation of Bacons Rebellion. The
prominent nineteenth century historian George Bancroft, writer
of History of the United States, argues that Bacons Rebellion
was a prologue to the American Revolution a century later. The
causes of Bacons Rebellion, Bancroft believes, were parallel to
those which caused the American Revolution.1
By all accounts, only two full length books have been
authored on the subject. Thomas J. Wertenbakers Torchbearer of
the Revolution: The Story of Bacons Rebellion and Its Leader,
by its obvious title, proclaims Bacon as a hero and martyr for
democracy. By exploring the motives lead to the, Wertenbaker
argues that Bacon championed the cause of freedom and has never
received his proper place in history.2
1
George Bancroft, History of the United States, vol. 2
(Boston: Charles Bowen, 1837), 213-234, reprinted in Bacons
Rebellion: Prologue to the Revolution?, 33-42.2
Thomas J. Wertenbaker, Torchbearer of the Revolution: The
Story of Bacons Rebellion and Its Leader(Gloucester, Mass.:
P. Smith, 1965).
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
5/22
Schearer 5
The second work, Wilcomb E. Washburns Governor and the
Rebel: A History of Bacons Rebellion in Virginia, dismisses
Wertenbakers nationalistic approach. Washburn argues that the
rebellion was an attempt by Bacon and other landowners to expand
their holdings at the expense of frontier Indians. Through an
analysis of a significant amount of material written by Bacons
contemporaries, Washburn maintains that Bacons Rebellion had no
significant democratic ends; rather it existed out of social and
economic conditions, not political as Wertenbaker asserts.3
Another secondary source written with a nationalistic
fervor is Mary H. Flournoys Essays: Historical & Critical
entitled Bacons Rebellion. Flournoy contends that Bacon was a
hero and patriot, and ranked among others like William Wallace
of Scotland and John Hampden of England.4
Other writers tend to give less faith to patriotism and
more to economic and social conditions. Among them were Philip
Alexander Bruce, who argued that Virginias depressed economic
conditions were an important cause of the rebellion. The
nineteenth-century lecturer and writer John Fiske contends that
class warfare in seventeenth-century Virginia led to the
3
Wilcomb E. Washburn, Governor and the Rebel: A History of
Bacons Rebellion in Virginia (New York: Norton, 1972).4
Mary H. Flournoy, Essays: Historical & Critical (Freeport,
N.Y.: Books for Libraries Press, 1967), 11-21.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
6/22
Schearer 6
uprising. Bernard Bailyn, a mid-twentieth century historian,
makes similar claims as Fiske. Bailyn sees a power struggle
among social classes as the primary cause of the rebellion.5
Bacons Rebellion also proves to be a popular source of
fiction for many writers. Bertha Monica Stearns writes that
many fictitious works have tended to glorify Bacon as a hero,
giving credence to Wertenbakers analysis. While Wertenbakers
primary contention has been altered by Washburn, writers of
Bacons Rebellion fiction have remained loyal to the
nationalistic Bacon.6
Both Wertenbaker and Washburn (as well as their supporters)
appear to make compelling arguments for their respective cases.
Both accounts are fairly well researched and documented. What
appears to exist in the case of Bacons Rebellion is what Edmund
Randolph first explains. While most everyone could agree on the
facts of the rebellion, their interpretations could be
5
Philip Alexander Bruce, History of Virginia, vol. 3
(Chicago: American Historical Society, 1924), 183-195; John
Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbors, vol. 2 (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1897), 97-106; Bernard Bailyn, Politics and
Social Structure in Virginia, Seventeenth-Century America, ed.
James Morton Smith (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1959), 98-106; all reprinted in Bacons Rebellion:
Prologue to the Revolution? ed. John B. Frantz. Problems in
American Civilization, vol. 3. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath
and Company, 1969., 59-75.6
Bertha Monica Stearns, The Literary Treatment of Bacons
Rebellion in Virginia, The Virginia Magazine of History and
BiographyLII (July 1944): 171-179, reprinted in Bacons
Rebellion: Prologue to the Revolution?, 52-58.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
7/22
Schearer 7
different, similar to the events and interpretations of the
French Revolution.7
However, both of the major accounts lack a certain respect
for their failure to include a sufficient analysis of the laws
passed by the House of Burgesses during the summer of 1676.
Wertenbaker, who could surely buttress his nationalistic claim
with a cogent examination, devotes less than a page to such
analysis. Similarly, Washburn uses two pages to quote the laws
and less than a page to analyze them. He dismisses their
significance with no real explanation. Only George Bancroft
makes an attempt to analyze the laws, and in that attempt he
fails to underscore their significance.8
Certainly, therefore, it should reason that, along with
Wertenbaker and Washburns traditional primary sources, only
a detailed and explicit analysis of the laws passed during the
summer of 1676 would help to do proper justice to Mr. Bacon and
the role of Bacons Rebellion in American history.
Further, some bias, or at least the potential for it,
exists on the part of Washburn. His analysis of the causes of
Bacons Rebellion are strongly based on the writings of one
Robert Beverly. What Washburn neglects to mention is that
7
Washburn, 13.8
Bancroft, History of the United States, reprinted in
Bacons Rebellion: Prologue to the Revolution?, 33-42.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
8/22
Schearer 8
Beverlys father was one of Governor Berkeleys strongest
supporters. While this does not disqualify Beverlys account,
it should be looked on with careful evaluation, as Louis B.
Wright notes in his introduction to Beverlys published works.9
Washburn also too easily dismisses primary source material
which contradicts his thesis, virtually refusing to analyze it
for its supposed bias. A good example is Thomas Mathews The
Beginning, Progress, and Conclusion of Bacons Rebellion, which
Washburn fails to properly scrutinize for two seemingly
unsatisfactory reasons. First, Mathew was a Burgess with Bacon
(which would seem to lend at least some faith to his account),
and secondly, that it contradicts with Beverlys account of the
causes of the rebellion. Surely, if Washburns account fails to
reflect the potential bias in Beverlys account, Washburns
utilization of Beverly to dismiss Mathews work cannot be
justified.10
Primary sources, especially those easily dismissed by
Washburn, must be given a second look by students of history. A
new look at existing primary sources and a first sincere review
of the laws of the House of Burgesses can only further our
9
Robert Beverly, The History and Present State of Virginia,
ed. Louis B. Wright (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1947), xxvii.10
Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia: 1659/60-
1693, ed. H.R. McIlwaine (Richmond: Colonial Press, 1914),
microfiche; Washburn, 3-4.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
9/22
Schearer 9
understanding of the events of three centuries ago. By applying
this new approach, one can only hope to find the elusive answers
to Bacons Rebellion.
The causes of Bacons Rebellion were Indian threats,
oppressive taxes, restraints on trade, and mismanagement and
abuse in the government. The causes often create as much debate
as the interpretation of the rebellion itself. However, it
remains apparent that the causes of Bacons Rebellion expanded
well beyond the ambition and desire to expand land-holdings at
the expense of frontier Indians. Writing in the midst of the
rebellion, Bacon himself explains his reasons in his Manifesto
Concerning the Present Troubles in Virginia. He emphasizes the
problem that the frontier English had with Indians, who were
enemies...Robbers and Theeves and Invaders... He also claims
Governor Berkeley set up and illegal beaver trade monopoly with
the Indians.11 The significance of the Indian problem is
demonstrated by the concerted effort by Bacon to explain each
and every grievance concerning the Indians.
Thomas Mathew confirms the significance of the Indian
problem that Bacon mentions, in his The Beginning, Progress,
and Conclusion of Bacons Rebellion. He writes how his
11
Nathaniel Bacon, Manifesto Concerning the Present Troubles
in Virginia, The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography,
vol. I (1894): 55-58, reprinted in Bacons Rebellion: Prologue
to the Revolution?, 7-9.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
10/22
Schearer 10
herdsman Robert Hen and an Indian were killed by the Doeg
Indians. He also suggests that the Governors monopoly trading
with the Indians may have helped delay the Governors response
Indian threats.12
Finally, a frontier planters petition to Governor Berkeley
in the spring of 1676 virtually begged for a commission to be
granted to defend against the Indians. The planters complained
of murders, barbarous and inhuman treatment, and cruel torture.
They speak of planters being burned alive and fear of leaving
their homes. This document only further confirms the serious
threat that Indians played.13
Other factors helped to precipitate the rebellion, and
Bacon does not limit himself to the Indian threats. He cites,
among other things, government oppression, excessive taxation,
restraints on trade, and spounges [that] have suckt up the
Publique Treasure.14 Most of these are confirmed by Robert
Beverly, who, writing just after the turn of the century in
12
Thomas Mathew, The Beginning, Progress, and Conclusion of
Bacons Rebellion in Virginia, in the years 1675 & 1676,
(Rochester: G.P. Humphrey, 1897), microfiche, 8.13
England, Public Records Office, Frontier Planters PetitionGovernor Berkeley to Commission Volunteers Against the Indians,
(Spring 1676), C.O. 1/36 fol. 139, reprinted in The Old Dominion
in the Seventeenth Century: A Documentary History of Virginia,
1606-1689, ed. Warren M. Billings (Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina Press, 1975), 207.
14 Bacon, Manifesto, reprinted in Bacons Rebellion:
Prologue to the Revolution?, 7-9.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
11/22
Schearer 11
England, made similar conclusions about the cause of the
rebellion. Among the reasons he cites are restraints on trade,
caused by Parliaments Navigation Acts, and the resulting low
price of tobacco. He also considers excessive taxation (as a
result of splitting Virginia into proprietaries, contrary to the
colonys charter) and the Indian threats. However, he discards
government oppression by claiming Berkeley was entirely loved,
and had unanimously chosen; a Gentleman...against whom...there
had never been one single Complaint.15
Causes of the rebellion written in 1677 are similar to
those found during the rebellion. Another source of causes is
the complaints submitted by counties to the Royal Commissioners.
Several counties, among them Surry, Northampton, Rappahannock
(Sitterbourne Parish), and Charles City, submitted grievances.16
Many of these grievances were specifically incorporated into the
laws passed by the House of Burgesses during the summer. Among
those cited by the various counties are the difficulty in
replacing vestries, difficulty in obtaining public records,
15
Beverly, 74-75. It is important to note that Beverlys
father was a strong adherent of Governor Berkeley, and thus not
only his praise of Berkeley must be carefully understood, butthe potential for bias exists.16
After the conclusion of Bacons Rebellion (January 1677), a
Royal Commission of Investigation sought to inquire about the
causes of the rebellion. The investigators asked each county
for a list of grievances. Each county attempted to survey its
people for the prevailing views on the rebellions causes. The
grievances by county are a result of that Commissions request.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
12/22
Schearer 12
availability of appeal in legal cases, and term limits for
sheriffs.17
But the grievances are not limited to small complaints.
Specifically, Charles City County charges Berkeley with acting
contrary to the law, failing to protect the frontiersmen from
Indian threats, and government oppression.18
The report of the Royal Commissioners, composed of the
various county grievances, cites what are apparently the most
widespread complaints among the colonists. The Murders,
Rapines and outrages of the Indians became soe much the more
Barbarous, fierce and frequent... The Commissioners also cite
oppressive taxes for the erection of useless forts and the
monopoly trade Berkeley set up with the Indians. Since after
publick Proclamation prohibiting all trade with the Indians
(they complaine) hee privately gave commission to some of his
Friendes to truck with them...19
The major factors which precipitated Bacons Rebellion are
clear from the various sources. Among those which stand out the
most are Indian threats, oppressive taxes, restraints on trade,
17
Journals of the House of Burgesses, 99-101.18
Charles City County Grievances, The Virginia Magazine of
History and Biography, vol. III (1896): 132-147, reprinted in
Bacons Rebellion: Prologue to the Revolution?, 12-22.19
Narratives of the Insurrections: 1675-1690, ed. Charles M.
Andrews, Original Narratives of Early American History (New
York: Barnes & Noble, 1943), 108-109.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
13/22
Schearer 13
and mismanagement in the government. However, the small but
surely not insignificant complaints about term limits, public
records and the courts. The grievances, as cited by Bacon, the
various counties, and others of that time, are important because
they show where the colonists wanted change. The grievances
show a growing desire for important political reforms in
Virginia.
Some have attempted to identify Bacon as simply a lawless
rebel, attacking Indians and seizing land because of a few
frontier skirmishes. If Bacon would not have died (presumably
from dysentery), it would have been highly likely that he would
have been placed on trial, specifically (at least) for his
actions against the Indians. However, without a written
constitution and legal underpinnings, it is difficult to
conclude with a reasonable amount of a certainty that Bacon
would have been found guilty. The establishment of some sort of
legal reasoning would have to exist to examine his actions.
However, it appears Bacon was not a lawless rebel as some
would attempt to identify him. A simple legal understanding of
the situation appears to clear Bacon of all charges that may
have been precipitated by his actions against Indians. The
first important document is Bacons Submission, where he was
granted a full pardon for his actions from the beginning of the
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
14/22
Schearer 14
rebellion (March 1676) to June 9, 1676.20 Since he did not have
a commission to act against the Indians prior to that time, he
was in effect acting against the law. But the pardon forgives
those actions. Bacons commission was obtained on June 24,
1676, allowing him to conduct raids against the Indians by the
legal authority of Berkeley. Since there are no charges against
Bacon after June 9 and before June 24, it appears as if Bacons
actions against the Indians are not prosecutable and not
punishable.
Bacons seizure and burning of Jamestown is a different
case. If Bacons actions to seize and burn Jamestown cannot be
justified, one could say te same about the American Revolution a
century later. That, precisely, is the concept of the
revolution and why Bacons Rebellion is a prologue. A
revolution, by definition, cannot be legal because it attempts
to overthrow an established government or break away as the
colonists did in 1776. History does not judge the legality of
the American Revolution because it succeeded. The same cannot
be said of Bacons Rebellion.
One of the least scrutinized set of sources relating to
Bacons Rebellion are the laws passed by the House of Burgesses
during the summer of 1676. An examination of these laws sends a
20
England, Bacons Submission, Coventry Papers, LXXVII,
fol. 116, reprinted in A Documentary History of Virginia, 273-
274.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
15/22
Schearer 15
clear message about what was on the minds of Bacon and his
followers.
The meetings are often labeled Bacons Assembly for his
supposed influence. In fact, Bacon was elected a Burgess from
Henrico County, and the majority of the laws passed deal
specifically with those problems encountered by Bacon and his
followers: Indian threats, oppressive taxes, restraints on
trade, and mismanagement in the government. In this light, the
laws should be seen as solutions and reforms to problems in the
colony and Governor Berkeleys policies. Even further, the laws
should viewed in context to the causes of Bacons Rebellion, as
previously discussed.21
The importance of the Indian threats cannot be underscored
enough by the first three acts of the Assembly, which
specifically dealt with the Indians. Act I named ...Nathaniell
Bacon, junr. Esq. genll. and commander in cheife of the force
raised... against the Indians. It also provided for a force of
one thousand men, as well as any volunteers that wanted to
participate. Act II was a specific blow to the illegal trading
monopoly Berkeley had established with frontier Indians (hence
his failure to provide protection against them). The act
prohibited all trade with the Indians, except those deemed
21
The laws, if they are to be viewed as solutions to problems
in the colony and Berkeleys policies, should only confirm the
causes of the rebellion that have already been discussed.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
16/22
Schearer 16
friendly. Act III helped to pay for the Indian war, by
confiscating all land deserted by the Indians, ...dispose to
the use of the publique towards defraying the charge of this
warr.22
The next set of laws proved to be the most intriguing
statutes devised in one hundred years. They are important
political reforms which are similar to those a century later.
While they appear to be relatively simple measures, the
fundamental concepts they involved cannot be overlooked.
Act V provided term limits for sheriff, eliminated plural
officeholding, regulated fees for various dealings with the
local government, and penalties for bribes. The colonists saw
...abuses and other ill management and administration
of...offices... and decided that reform was the only solution.23
Again, Act VI is a relatively simple measure. It begins by
complaining that ...the long continuance of vestries in
severall parishes... was a problem that needed to be remedied.
Act VI began to break up the church aristocracy because it
limited the terms of vestries to three years.24 This could even
22
The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of all the Lawsof Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the
year 1619, ed. William Waller Hening, vol. 1 (Richmond: R. & W.
& G. Bartow, 1823), microfiche, 341-352.
23 Ibid., 353-355.
24 Ibid., 356.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
17/22
Schearer 17
be interpreted as the first musings of the separation of church
and state, a truly radical concept for seventeenth-century
Virginia.
Limited suffrage was attained by Acts VI and VII. In
addition to breaking up the church aristocracy, it gave the
right to vote for vestries to freemen (where it had previously
been limited to freeholders). The right to vote for freemen was
extended to voting for burgesses in Act VII.25
Probably the most radical measure was Act VIII, in response
to the complaint that:
Whereas the justices of the county courts of this
country have accustommarily sett and annually laid a rate
or sessment upon the people of their counties, in and under
the name of their countie levie, and whereas it hath been
suspected by divers persons that under colour thereof many
sums have bin raised in divers counties, for the interest
of particular persons to the prejudice of the said
counties...26
Act VIII provided for the election of representatives to vote
with the justices of the county courts. The unmistakable
significance of this act alone cannot be neglected: the
Virginians asserted their right to tax themselves, complaining
of taxation without representation. This revolutionary concept,
often limited and confined to the American Revolution a century
later, is clearly defined by this law.
25 Ibid.
26 Ibid., 357.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
18/22
Schearer 18
Other acts, while certainly not as radical, are important
and should not be included: the elimination of tax exemptions
for Ministers and Councilors, limiting tax collections to
specific times of the year, and correcting government abuses.27
The laws of Bacons Assembly are significant because they
demonstrate solutions of the people to the problems of the
government. The laws were important political reforms which
might seem absurdly obvious of the nature to twentieth-century
scholars, but for 1676 Virginia? Not only do the laws help to
confirm the previously described causes, but they lead to the
addition of taxation without representation, a truly radical
notion in seventeenth-century Virginia, as another cause of
Bacons Rebellion.
The problems of 18th-century colonists which led to
important political reforms are generally accepted: oppressive
taxation, taxation without representation, restraints on trade
and limited freedoms. The causes of Bacons Rebellion were
oppressive taxation, taxation without representation, Indian
threats and the resulting limited freedoms, and restraints on
trade caused by the Navigation Acts. Therefore, the obvious
conclusion is that those factors which precipitated Bacons
Rebellion are strikingly similar to those which caused the
American Revolution a century later.
27 Ibid., 358-365.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
19/22
Schearer 19
If students of history chose to call our Founding Fathers
revolutionaries, as no doubt they would, than it must be
concluded that they cannot ignore Nathaniel Bacon and his
followers in their praise. Not only did the American Revolution
and Bacons Rebellion have similar causes, but the remedies
proposed and passed during Bacons Assembly present a clear
case that the rebellion was not simply a social and economic one.
Government mismanagement, government oppression and the
suppression of freedoms and liberties were among the complaints
of Virginians and they chose to fight back. The political
implications of Bacons Rebellion can not and will not be
ignored.
Bacons Rebellion did not produce a democracy, and neither
did the American Revolution. But important political reforms
occured during both periods which set the United States on a
path toward democracy. Neither Bacons Rebellion nor the
American Revolution took place without unspeakable violence on
both sides of the battlefield, but few revolutions ever do. To
claim that Bacons Rebellion had democratic ends seems tenuous.
Similarly, a simple fight over land does not stand up in the
face of a preponderence of evidence otherwise.
Nathaniel Bacon fought not only against Indian threats, but
against the oppressive rule of Sir William Berkeley. He fought
for important political reforms and principles that many today
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
20/22
Schearer 20
take for granted. He fought for America before anyone knew what
America was.
Some may argue Bacon deserves a place in history that has
long been denied him. But Bacon should be viewed as the
torchbearer of the American Revolution because the political
reforms he advocated are strikingly similar to those during the
American Revolution.
Bacons Rebellion, as a series of events in American
history, should therefore be viewed as the prologue to the
American Revolution, a century earlier. The War of Independence
was fought for the same principles and the same political
reforms. Indeed, the American Revolution did not start in
Concord and Lexington in 1775, but almost one hundred years
earlier in Virginia, by Nathaniel Bacon. The political reforms
of Bacons Rebellion, as those of the American Revolution, layed
the groundwork for democracy.
There is no monument, no statue, no memorial honoring the
first martyr for American independence. There is no tribute, no
recognition, no homage paid to Americas first patriot. There
is but one man in American history that deserves such praise but
has failed to receive it. He is Nathaniel Bacon.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
21/22
Schearer 21
WORKS CITED
Bacons Rebellion, ed. Robert Middlekauff. Berkeley Series
in American History. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964.
Bacons Rebellion: Prologue to the Revolution? ed. John B.
Frantz. Problems in American Civilization, vol. 3.
Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath and Company, 1969.
Beverly, Robert. The History and Present State of Virginia,
ed. Louis B. Wright. Chapel Hill: University of North
Carolina Press, 1947.
Burk, John. The History of Virginia from its First Settlement
to the Present, vol. 2. Peterburg, Virginia: Dickson &
Pescud, 1805, microfiche.
Flournoy, Mary H. Essays: Historical & Critical. Freeport,
N.Y.: Books for Libraries Press, 1967.
Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia: 1659/60-1693,
ed. H.R. McIlwaine. Richmond: Colonial Press, 1914,
microfiche.
Mathew, Thomas. The Beginning, Progress, and Conclusion of
Bacons Rebellion in Virginia, in the years 1675 &
1676. Rochester: G.P. Humphrey, 1897, microfiche.
More News from Virginia: Being a True and Full Relation ofall Occurrences in that Countrey, since the Death of Nath.
Bacon. With an account of thirteen persons that have been
tryed and Executed for their Rebellion there. London:
Printed for William Harris, next door to the Turnstile
without Moor-gate, 1677, microfiche.
Narratives of the Insurrections: 1675-1690, ed. Charles M.
Andrews. Original Narratives of Early American History.
New York: Barnes & Noble, 1943.
The Old Dominion in the Seventeenth Century: A DocumentaryHistory of Virginia, 1606-1689, ed. Warren M. Billings.
Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975.
The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of all the Laws of
Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the
year 1619, ed. William Waller Hening, vol. 1. Richmond: R.
& W. & G. Bartow, 1823, microfiche.
8/3/2019 Bacon's Rebellion: Mere Insurrection or Abortive Revolution?
22/22
Schearer 22
Stearns, Bertha Monica. The Literary Treatment of Bacons
Rebellion in Virginia. The Virginia Magazine of History
and BiographyLII (July 1944): 171-179.
Strange News from Virginia: Being a full and true Account
of the Life and Death of Nathanael Bacon Esquire, Who was
the only Cause and Original of all the late Troubles in
that Country. With a full Relation of all the Accidents
which have happened in the late War there between the
Christians and Indians. London: Printed for William
Harris, next door to the Turnstile without Moor-gate, 1677,
microfiche.
Tracts and Other Papers, relating principally to the Origin,
Settlement, and Progress of the Colonies in North
America, from the Discovery of the Country to the year
1776, ed. Peter Force. Gloucester, Mass.: Peter
Smith, 1963.
Washburn, Wilcomb E. Governor and the Rebel: A History of
Bacons Rebellion in Virginia. New York: Norton, 1972.
Webb, Stephen Saunders. 1676: The End of American
Independence. New York: Knopf, 1984.
Wertenbaker, Thomas J. Torchbearer of the Revolution: The
Story of Bacons Rebellion and Its Leader. Gloucester,
Mass.: P. Smith, 1965.