American Leviathan: Empire, Nation, and Revolutionary Frontier (review)

Patrick Griffin's American Leviathan: Empire, Nation, and Revolutionary Frontier challenges us to reconsider the parameters of the American Revolution. In this study of the American backcountry, Griffin ably demonstrates that between 1763 and 1795 Ohio Valley settlers contended with Indians and British or American governments over the meanings of sovereignty and social obligation. Theirs was a violent and chaotic Hobbesian world, and the process of confronting it redefined their relations to each other, the Indians, and the nascent American republic.

A "motley mix of peoples" streamed into the region at the 1763 close of the Seven Years' War, most via Pennsylvania or Virginia. They did so despite a British ban on settlement beyond the Appalachian ridge, frustrating imperial plans to consolidate colonial oversight and avoid strife with the Delawares, Shawnees, and Mingoes then residing in the Ohio Valley. Settlers of the "dark and bloody ground" west of the line forfeited much of their identity as British subjects and were consigned to confront head-on the question that distant imperial officials now pondered: Could the Indians adapt to "civilization"? Dreams of claiming land by preemption also clashed with the interests of eastern financiers and speculators, including some well-placed men like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

According to Griffin, British Empire in the West effectively ended by 1771 with the obvious collapse of imperial authority and shifting of responsibility for the region's "ungovernable" subjects and intractable Indians to the eastern colonies. Amidst the ensuing chaos, Virginia briefly asserted its sovereignty in the area, alongside the protests of Pennsylvania and potential colonizers. By 1774, however, visible attempts at establishing rational relations collapsed, and with them common settlers' assumptions that secure futures depended upon cooperation with government or elites —a "subtle but revolutionary change," according to Griffin.

The West remained largely peripheral to the British and the Americans during the War for Independence. Most settlers, convinced the British were arming Indians, became "cautiously pro-patriot." Nonetheless, their marginal status remained clear;the Continental Congress and army showed interest mainly in the men and provisions the region could surrender. Despite simmering violence, settlers' hopes of a meaningful military presence went largely unfulfilled. Underprotected and unappreciated, they "teeter[ed] … between panic and rage."

Virginia attempted another landgrab in 1778, tethered to the dual western ventures of land office and solo military expedition. Pandering to settlers' fears and then passing a supposedly moderate land law were meant to bind common people's loyalties to Virginia's government and speculator elites. Their reactions—ranging from protest to outright defiance—trumpeted an unwillingness to be patronized or manipulated and a growing insistence on having some voice in the future state of western affairs.

Nonetheless, years of violent conflict with Indian neighbors not only contributed to a growing race hatred, but left common men and women vulnerable to manipulation by "betters" promising social order in return for cooperation. Security proved ephemeral, however, and settlers found the end of the War for Independence had little meaning for conditions in the West. Chaos and violence continued for a decade after the 1783 signing of the Treaty of Paris. Complicating matters, in 1784 the new federal government claimed authority over western lands north of the Ohio River, while for a time Virginia claimed sovereignty over those to the south.

Throughout, settlers insisted that the Indians must be subdued or removed as debenture on rights of self-preservation and precondition to cooperating with any so-called authority. The American government's continued failure to launch a war of conquest against Ohio Valley Indians convinced westerners that eastern leaders cared little about their well-being. In western Pennsylvania, common settlers' grievances against regional elites became especially pronounced. Prosperous neighbors and speculators—most with eastern ties—smashed competitors, tenants, and debtors and amassed both wealth and land. Tensions flared: rich versus poor, white versus Indian, East versus West.

The passing of a 1791 federal excise tax on whiskey sparked a passionate reaction in western Pennsylvania. Outraged at apparent...