- Email: [email protected]
Hubs of Empire: The Southeastern Lowcountry and British Caribbean
Journal of Historical Geography xxx (2015) 1e2
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Historical Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhg
Review Hubs of Empire: The Southeastern Lowcountry and British Caribbean, Matthew Mulcahy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (2014). vii þ 244 pages, US$24.95 paperback The historiographies of modern nation states such as the United States have shaped the way we conceptualize geographic boundaries in the era before nation states; in other words, scholars project the boundaries of the modern nation state onto pre-nation state worlds. The surging interest in Atlantic history over the last two decades has encouraged historians to transcend nationalist historiographies and redefine regions, privileging the geographic regions that made sense to early modern actors. Many historians have observed that the Lowcountry (chiefly South Carolina and then Georgia) on the North American Mainland had deep connections to a larger Caribbean world. In Hubs of Empire: the Southeastern Lowcountry and British Caribbean, Matthew Mulcahy offers a largely synthetic history of this ‘Greater Caribbean’ region. He clearly shows us the extent to which the Lowcountry, until 1776, shared more in common with Caribbean islands than with the other mainland colonies that would form the United States after the Revolution. Mulcahy explains that if we embrace the conceptual framework of the Greater Caribbean then ‘the Lowcountry appears less an exceptional place on the mainland and more like the plantation colonies in British America as a whole, while the islands became more linked to the mainland plantation zone rather than distinct from it’ (p. 6). He argues, compellingly, that these colonies were the most important, politically and economically, of the British colonies in the Americas before the American Revolution and ‘they warrant the greatest attention from students and scholars of early British America’ (p. 13). Mulcahy lays out a chronological overview of the Greater Caribbean from the first settlement by the English in the early seventeenth century through to the pivotal political crises of the 1760s and 1770s and he demonstrates common experiences in the histories of the English colonies in the region. Most of these were colonies developed as extensions of Barbados, the wealthiest English colony in the Americas in the seventeenth century. Mulcahy is also very attentive to the histories of the indigenous people in the Caribbean and in the Lowcountry, offering a short overview of their societies before first contact with Europeans. On the whole, violence, death, wealth and exploitation defined the Greater Caribbean. It was shaped by tropical and sub-tropical climates and was more subject to earthquakes and hurricanes. Death and disease were more prevalent in the Greater Caribbean than in the rest of the mainland colonies. Plantations and staple crops, particularly sugar in the Caribbean and rice in the Lowcountry, became the economic engines of the region. By the eighteenth century, the most significant commonality in this region was the
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhg.2015.08.004 0305-7488
enslaved African population who worked these plantations and who made up the vast majority of each colony's population. African culture and resistance shaped the region. The planter elite in the region were far wealthier on average than colonists in the rest of the Americas and they were often able to return to England or, in South Carolina, move to Charleston to become absentees. Because these colonies were the most lucrative in the Americas, they were more subject to political disputes and warfare. Because of the prevalence of warfare and the threat of slave resistance, white society in the Lowcountry and in the Caribbean was more dependent on British military and naval support. Their wealth also enabled them to achieve greater political representation in England. Mulcahy's work is clearly targeted at students and scholars of early US history and this target audience has forced him, on the one hand, to embrace a new definition of region but, on the other hand, to adopt a very traditional US history chronological framework. He tells us that ‘Seeing the seventeenth- and eighteenthcentury Lowcountry as part of the Greater Caribbean, and the Caribbean as a central part of early British America, not only restores something of a seventeenth- and eighteenth-century perspective to our understanding of early American history; it also highlights the diverse influences that shaped what became the United States’ (p. 124). Mulcahy, relying on the standard US history narrative, ends his story with the political crisis preceding the American Revolution. He argues that the commonalities in the region were greatest before the crisis of 1760s that led to the formation of the United States. The drawback to this traditional chronological framing is that it privileges the political linkages between the Lowcountry and the Caribbean islands and their political allegiance over the many other significant environmental, social, cultural and economic commonalities that Mulcahy explores. This chronology redirects focus once again towards nationalist historiographies and the creation of the United States. While this is certainly not a major flaw in Mulcahy's work, it does leave one wondering about the shared histories of these plantation societies after the American Revolution. For example, among the characteristics that these colonies share, Mulcahy suggests that ‘Most importantly, enslaved Africans formed a majority, often an overwhelming majority of the population’ (p. 5). If enslaved black majorities were the most important commonality then one could argue the abolition of the slave trade in 1807 or even the emancipation of the slaves in the British Caribbean in 1833 would be more fitting places to end this Greater Caribbean story. Despite the familiar and potentially limiting chronology in Mulcahy's work, there is no doubt that he makes an important contribution with this book. He underscores how significant the Greater Caribbean region was to the early modern British Atlantic. This is a point that Lowcountry and Caribbean specialists know well but
2
Review / Journal of Historical Geography xxx (2015) 1e2
Mulcahy offers a book that will help to convey this idea to nonspecialists and, particularly, to students of early United States history. He incorporates the most significant recent historiographical literature and offered an extensive ‘Essay on Sources’ that will be very useful for students and more advanced scholars. He also moves beyond secondary sources and occasionally draws on some important primary sources to help enrich his text. He writes with clear, thoughtful and engaging prose. This book would be an
ideal choice for undergraduate courses on the early United States or on the Atlantic World. Justin Roberts Dalhousie University, Canada E-mail address: [email protected].
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Historical Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhg
Review Hubs of Empire: The Southeastern Lowcountry and British Caribbean, Matthew Mulcahy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (2014). vii þ 244 pages, US$24.95 paperback The historiographies of modern nation states such as the United States have shaped the way we conceptualize geographic boundaries in the era before nation states; in other words, scholars project the boundaries of the modern nation state onto pre-nation state worlds. The surging interest in Atlantic history over the last two decades has encouraged historians to transcend nationalist historiographies and redefine regions, privileging the geographic regions that made sense to early modern actors. Many historians have observed that the Lowcountry (chiefly South Carolina and then Georgia) on the North American Mainland had deep connections to a larger Caribbean world. In Hubs of Empire: the Southeastern Lowcountry and British Caribbean, Matthew Mulcahy offers a largely synthetic history of this ‘Greater Caribbean’ region. He clearly shows us the extent to which the Lowcountry, until 1776, shared more in common with Caribbean islands than with the other mainland colonies that would form the United States after the Revolution. Mulcahy explains that if we embrace the conceptual framework of the Greater Caribbean then ‘the Lowcountry appears less an exceptional place on the mainland and more like the plantation colonies in British America as a whole, while the islands became more linked to the mainland plantation zone rather than distinct from it’ (p. 6). He argues, compellingly, that these colonies were the most important, politically and economically, of the British colonies in the Americas before the American Revolution and ‘they warrant the greatest attention from students and scholars of early British America’ (p. 13). Mulcahy lays out a chronological overview of the Greater Caribbean from the first settlement by the English in the early seventeenth century through to the pivotal political crises of the 1760s and 1770s and he demonstrates common experiences in the histories of the English colonies in the region. Most of these were colonies developed as extensions of Barbados, the wealthiest English colony in the Americas in the seventeenth century. Mulcahy is also very attentive to the histories of the indigenous people in the Caribbean and in the Lowcountry, offering a short overview of their societies before first contact with Europeans. On the whole, violence, death, wealth and exploitation defined the Greater Caribbean. It was shaped by tropical and sub-tropical climates and was more subject to earthquakes and hurricanes. Death and disease were more prevalent in the Greater Caribbean than in the rest of the mainland colonies. Plantations and staple crops, particularly sugar in the Caribbean and rice in the Lowcountry, became the economic engines of the region. By the eighteenth century, the most significant commonality in this region was the
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhg.2015.08.004 0305-7488
enslaved African population who worked these plantations and who made up the vast majority of each colony's population. African culture and resistance shaped the region. The planter elite in the region were far wealthier on average than colonists in the rest of the Americas and they were often able to return to England or, in South Carolina, move to Charleston to become absentees. Because these colonies were the most lucrative in the Americas, they were more subject to political disputes and warfare. Because of the prevalence of warfare and the threat of slave resistance, white society in the Lowcountry and in the Caribbean was more dependent on British military and naval support. Their wealth also enabled them to achieve greater political representation in England. Mulcahy's work is clearly targeted at students and scholars of early US history and this target audience has forced him, on the one hand, to embrace a new definition of region but, on the other hand, to adopt a very traditional US history chronological framework. He tells us that ‘Seeing the seventeenth- and eighteenthcentury Lowcountry as part of the Greater Caribbean, and the Caribbean as a central part of early British America, not only restores something of a seventeenth- and eighteenth-century perspective to our understanding of early American history; it also highlights the diverse influences that shaped what became the United States’ (p. 124). Mulcahy, relying on the standard US history narrative, ends his story with the political crisis preceding the American Revolution. He argues that the commonalities in the region were greatest before the crisis of 1760s that led to the formation of the United States. The drawback to this traditional chronological framing is that it privileges the political linkages between the Lowcountry and the Caribbean islands and their political allegiance over the many other significant environmental, social, cultural and economic commonalities that Mulcahy explores. This chronology redirects focus once again towards nationalist historiographies and the creation of the United States. While this is certainly not a major flaw in Mulcahy's work, it does leave one wondering about the shared histories of these plantation societies after the American Revolution. For example, among the characteristics that these colonies share, Mulcahy suggests that ‘Most importantly, enslaved Africans formed a majority, often an overwhelming majority of the population’ (p. 5). If enslaved black majorities were the most important commonality then one could argue the abolition of the slave trade in 1807 or even the emancipation of the slaves in the British Caribbean in 1833 would be more fitting places to end this Greater Caribbean story. Despite the familiar and potentially limiting chronology in Mulcahy's work, there is no doubt that he makes an important contribution with this book. He underscores how significant the Greater Caribbean region was to the early modern British Atlantic. This is a point that Lowcountry and Caribbean specialists know well but
2
Review / Journal of Historical Geography xxx (2015) 1e2
Mulcahy offers a book that will help to convey this idea to nonspecialists and, particularly, to students of early United States history. He incorporates the most significant recent historiographical literature and offered an extensive ‘Essay on Sources’ that will be very useful for students and more advanced scholars. He also moves beyond secondary sources and occasionally draws on some important primary sources to help enrich his text. He writes with clear, thoughtful and engaging prose. This book would be an
ideal choice for undergraduate courses on the early United States or on the Atlantic World. Justin Roberts Dalhousie University, Canada E-mail address: [email protected].