1. John Ericson

    A great piece Stephanie. I would argue that, like most conflicts, there are a confluence of events and circumstances that caused Virginia to join in the fight for separation. We might look to the dismissal of the House of Burgesses and the meeting that takes place extra legally in the wake of that dismissal forming a shadow government. Certainly the Crown felt that many acts of defiance were subversive if not outright treason. Hierarchy of cause can be a bit of a sticky wicket. But, your argument for the Agnew dismissal is certainly worthy of discussion far beyond what it has been. Thanks for a thought provoking piece.

    • Hey, John. I completely agree that’s the case in the political realm. The Revolution was “a brewin'” among Virginia’s political elite for a long time at this point. However, Agnew is the first time the barrier is truly broken at the social level and proves that this Tory/Whig divide isn’t just an issue among the elite. Now the Revolution is real across society and up and down the hierarchy. It proves to Dunmore that he has allies, but it also proves that average citizens outside of the Committees of Safety were ready to step up. To have brawls between politicians is one thing, but to have it trickle down into parishes and across the society is now another. Now patriots are attacking ministers–who represent the king? The situation just became a lot more serious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *