Being American in Europe, 1750–1860

1. “English association,” 1750–1783

Like many colonials, Benjamin Franklin had mixed feelings toward Great Britain . He had nothing but praise for English culture, Protestantism, and the common law. He hoped that Britain would not oppress the colonies but, “like an affectionate parent,” nurture their liberty and prosperity. Yet Franklin feared that the very features that made him proud to be British—Protestant faith, political liberty, and commercial prosperity—were in decline across the Atlantic. The “prevailing corruption and degeneracy of your people,” Franklin told an English correspondent, seemed to be on the rise during the 1750s. He worried that British traits might not survive in Britain itself, but he was sure that the provinces would maintain them. As colonial Americans grew alarmed at the direction of British society, they reaffirmed allegiance to the attributes of Britishness. They developed an appreciation for provincial life, but not because it was turning them into something new. Rather, life on the Empire’s margins allowed colonials to enjoy the best features of its civilization while shielding them from its flaws.1 The first stirrings of independence grew out of a sense that the English saw provincials as their inferiors. As tensions mounted, colonials strained to demonstrate their worthiness to be treated as equals by reaffirming their allegiance to British ideals. At a 1766 award ceremony honoring essayists charged with exploring the benefits of Anglo-American union, William Smith of Philadelphia explained that “Civil Liberty, the Protestant Religion, the principles of Toleration , in their purity . . . subsist but in few places of the globe; and Great Britain is their principal residence.” John Morgan echoed Smith, praising the “noble spirit of freedom, which actuates the Englishman.” He called the audience’s attention to “the amazing increase of riches and power” that Britain and the colonies derived from commerce. The speakers hoped that their sentiments would be seen as American contributions to repairing the damage the Stamp Act controversy had done to the “mutual confidence” between Britain and her colonies.2 c h a p t e r o n e “English association” 1750–1783 10 Being American in Europe, 1750–1860 Colonists feared that laws like the Stamp Act demonstrated that the English saw them as subjects instead of partners in the advance of British civilization. Francis Hopkinson, another contributor to Smith’s essay contest, agreed that commerce, freedom, and Protestantism were uniquely advanced under the flag of Great Britain, which flew as proudly over Philadelphia, Charles Town, and Boston as over London. “Are we not one nation and one people?” Hopkinson asked. “We of America, are in all respects Englishmen, notwithstanding that the Atlantic rolls her waves between us and the throne to which we all owe allegiance .” British actions that seemed to belittle colonials provoked a variety of responses, from reaffirmations of loyalty to King and Parliament to arguments about the superiority of the colonies to the corrupt Old World. Increasingly, provincials argued that the colonies more perfectly embodied British ideals than Britain itself.3 Franklin, White, Morgan, and Hopkinson were not merely observers of imperial relations. They were experienced travelers with personal knowledge of Britain and the Continent. Their travels gave them an especially sophisticated perspective on British identity, which was defined partly against the nations of the Continent, especially France. Visiting Britain enhanced travelers’ appreciation for life in the colonies. John Morgan knew he might obtain fame and honor if he elected to remain in Europe, Samuel Powel told a friend, but he was returning to Philadelphia because “his Amor Partiæ maintains an upper hand.” Yet travel abroad also reinforced provincials’ British nationalism. They could personally testify to the merits of British society, and if they had crossed the Channel they could speak to Britain’s virtues vis-à-vis the Continent. They concluded that Americans benefited from access to the metropole, while the Atlantic insulated them from its imperfections. Even when they came to favor independence, travelers were reluctant to sever their emotional ties to Great Britain. The well-traveled South Carolina patriot Ralph Izard blamed English “bully[ing]” for colonials’ anxiety in the early years of the Revolutionary crisis. Yet he maintained that “the inhabitants of America . . . look upon their descent from Englishmen, and their connection with England, as their greatest glory and honor.” Colonial travelers established a pattern of American ambivalence to Great Britain that would last well into the next century.4 The Grand Tour Ideal Colonial Americans traveled to Europe for a variety of reasons. Some...