Draft: What "They Say" of Bacon's Rebellion

As I have read, the underlying cause of Bacon’s Rebellion has generally been divided into two perspectives. These two perspectives are the issues within the microcosm and the macrocosm. On the one hand, authors state that the microcosm aspects of the cause of Bacon’s Rebellion are the resolving factors, and on the other hand, other authors state the macrocosm aspects are the resolving factors. These particular readings include Howard Zinn, “A Young People’s History of the United States”, Peter Thompson, “Counties and Commonalties: New Perspectives on Bacon’s Rebellion”, Wilcomb E. Washburn, “The Governor and the Rebel: A History of Bacon’s Rebellion in Virginia”, and William H. Seiler, “The Journal of Southern History.”

Contained within Peter Thompson’s passage, he provides his perspective of Bacon’s purpose for helping create a rebellion, “In conclusion I believe that the Cause that Bacon and his followers fought for was independence but not Independence, republicanism rather than Republicanism.” In contrast, within Wilcomb E. Washburn’s passage he states, “It was the frontiersmen’s continuing violation of Governor Berkeley’s efforts to settle the Indian-white relationship with fairness to both sides that precipitated the rebellion.” Peter Thompson theorizes Bacon’s own motives, but Wilcomb E. Washburn theorizes external influence as the cause of the Rebellion rather than an independent, self propelling influence existing within Bacon. Both Thompson and Washburn theorize provide causes within the microcosm.

William H. Seiler claims in his book that, “Those who accept broader causes for the rebellion than the immediate causes of race relations and settlement policy will probably offer the greatest criticism of this revision.” Such broader causes could include the combination of influential factors that come into play when considering the economy as the cause. The economy as the cause of the Rebellion is an aspect of the macrocosm. Similarly, Howard Zinn comes to the conclusion that, “Bacon’s Rebellion came about because of a chain of oppression.” Zinn then proceeds to explain some of the implications of the economy on Bacon’s Rebellion. Specifically, he speaks of the underclass and points out that Bacon’s Rebellion was primarily comprised of the underclass, makes the distinction and highlights the great distance between the rich and poor at that time, and emphasizes on the wealthy elite who controlled the British colonies in the North (he states the wealthy elite had three primary fears: Indian hostility, the danger of slave revolts, and the growing anger of poor whites). According to Seiler, arguing from the macrocosm offers the greatest credibility. In terms of approaching issues form the macrocosm, it seems that Howard Zinn is most suitable.