1776 as 1917: Sarah Pearsall's World History of the American Revolution

00:00:30 Andrew Keen: Hello, everybody. It is Friday, 05/29/2026. We're having an early conversation about America's anniversary, its 250th anniversary with a couple of very distinguished American historians. Earlier today, I did a show with Emory University historian Dominic Erdozain on whether we should love or hate The United States in his new book, To Love a Country, the Problem of Patriotism in America. Erdozain argues that patriotism in America is, by definition, exceptional, rooted in privilege and discrimination and injustice and all the other sorts of things that historians like to write about. But my guest today is another historian from another distinguished university, Sarah MS Pearsall, teaches at Johns Hopkins. She has a very interesting, very counterintuitive new book out. It's called Freedom Around the Globe [official title: Freedom Round the Globe], a World History of the American Revolution, which in a sense turns the American Revolution inside out. Sarah is joining us from Baltimore where she lives. As I said, she teaches at Johns Hopkins. Sarah, is that a fair way to think about your book that you're transforming the American physical revolution on the American soil in 1776 to a kind of global revolution?

00:01:57 Sarah Pearsall: In a manner of speaking, yes. And thank you so much for having me on today. Partly, what I wanted to do was to expand the framework to widen the perspective, of what we think of as the American Revolution and think about it more in global terms. So it's still telling the story of the American revolution, but it's doing so from a sort of vantage point of a much wider perspective.

00:02:29 Andrew Keen: Yeah. A meta vantage point. I'm not sure if you've had the opportunity to read Erdozain's To Love a Country. I'm not sure that you would necessarily disagree. But what do you make of that kind of book? I not necessarily Erdozain's specific argument, but America was founded in one kind of criminality or another.

00:02:52 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I mean, I think, you know, there are complicated roots to the American nation state, and, obviously, they're grounded in this particular moment of its revolution and the sort of sense that there is a kind of exceptionalist narrative that Americans did something that was extraordinary, unheard of, that they were the first to do it, I think, you know, require some revising. And I think that some of the aspects that are exceptional have been therefore missed because, in fact, we're sort of thinking about the wrong things. So I would say there was plenty of resistance against the British Empire, and there were rebellions elsewhere, including in The Caribbean. But the way that the American Revolution played out and its sort of momentum towards creating this new nation, I think, is a pretty extraordinary story. Now, I mean, I do think that there are sort of things about that patriotic exceptionalist narrative and the sort of strains of racism and injustice that obviously also are there, are worth our thinking about. And I think in this 250th year, it's really provoked a lot of people to sort of think about that and to come out with it. And, of course, our current political situation also is a driver to that rethinking.

00:04:20 Andrew Keen: What's our current political situation?

00:04:23 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I mean, under our the current White House and, the sort of I mean, really, I would say, pretty shocking, changes that have taken place, transformations in terms of federal power, in terms of understandings of the presidency. I mean, it's accelerated, enormously sort of momentum that was there from, earlier sort of tendencies to increase executive power, but it's sort of taken on a kind of, you know, momentum that's, I think, surprised many of us, in terms of the force with which that has happened.

00:05:05 Andrew Keen: You describe it very politely, Sarah. You your expertise is on North American history over the last five hundred years. As I said, you teach at Johns Hopkins. Remind us what the world was like in 1776.

00:05:21 Sarah Pearsall: Well question. So, I mean, one thing I wanna say is that people don't realize how many British colonies there were in North America in 1775. People talk so much about the 13 colonies, but there were far more than 13 colonies, at least double that. You can even put it up to 32 depending on how you count whether, you know, groups of islands as multiple or otherwise. But in any case, there are British colonies in The Caribbean. There are British colonies in Canada. There are British colonies now in the Florida's, which is a much larger land mass, East And West Florida. And I think people often just too often have forgotten about those other colonies. And I think part of what we need to do is think about why some colonies rebelled and other colonies did not, in fact. Though there was often resistance and protest through all of them in the 1760s, that did not lead inevitably to rebellion and revolution, and we see a very different kind of narrative. I think we also see that slavery is a much more complicated factor than a simplistic understanding of the American Revolution being fought in order to preserve slavery. There are certain aspects of that are true, but if that were the main driver, we would have seen the Caribbean colonies absolutely coming on board this revolution, and they do not. So there is a much more kind of complicated situation, in that realm than I think people realize.

00:07:01 Andrew Keen: Your book is called Freedom Round the Globe, a World History of the American Revolution. Was there such a thing in 1775, 1776 as, quote, unquote, the world? Was there a globe? I mean, there was a physical globe, and geographers were beginning to make sense of the geography of the world. But, you know, the current American administration, of course, is not particularly keen on globalization. Was this the first shot, so to speak, of globalization in the late seven, seventeen hundreds?

00:07:33 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I think, early modern historians would say it had started before that, but I do think there is a globe, and there are certainly people thinking about the globe, including British imperial authorities who are interested in expanding British authority, British profit mindedness, other kinds of goals, in Asia, in Africa, in Latin America. All of these places are part of that equation, and there is, of course, a very strong set of trade connections that was long in existence between Europe and Asia, Europe and The Americas, The Americas and Asia. So all of those things are really, I would say, building momentum, creating a sense of the globe. There are sort of particularly notable events in that era, such as Captain Cook's voyages in The Pacific that are, again, really sort of seeking to expand a kind of British imperial authority into, new areas in the Pacific. Of course, there's long been European rivalries in those places. So I think it's absolutely fair to think about the globe, and I think many people are thinking about the globe. And partly what was surprising to me in working on this was that, people were much more aware of those connections than I had realized, previously. And partly, Americans are aware of things that are happening in India, for example, in the 1770s, in ways that were surprising to me. So that's sort of one of the things that I talk about in the book.

00:09:18 Andrew Keen: In the celebrations in a month for the 250th anniversary, the British are not gonna come out looking very good, I don't think. You're a historian. In the uber history of imperialism, how bad, how evil were the British?

00:09:34 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I mean, evil is a rather strong word. There are certainly very dark and pernicious forces in the British Empire from a very early stage, though nothing that would set them apart particularly from other empires, including the Spanish or the French or the Portuguese or the Dutch, which include things like the very, common use of slavery, the enslaving of indigenous peoples in The Americas in Africa. And I think, you know, that is a running theme from the very start. And I think, you know, that's certainly a sense of superiority, certainly a sense of cultural, religious, and racial superiority that combine in pretty, pernicious ways are certainly at the core of that expansion, a sort of willingness to put profit over people, is another aspect and the sort of use of joint stock companies and a kind of partnership between economic and economic development and political power that I think we see playing out, in different ways, including the East India Company's activities in Asia, which, partly affect what's going on with The Americas and what becomes known as the Boston Tea Party, which obviously tea is a commodity that's coming from Asia. So connecting that story, is sort of, is something that's kind of clear. And certainly, people at the time, Americans, Asians, and others started to see you're asking about the sort of evil nature of the British Empire. Many people at that time started to really feel that it was, that it was oppressive. And oppression is a word that they use a lot as is slavery. They feel that the British Empire is seeking to enslave them in some way, and that aspect, is certainly, one of the drivers of the American Revolution.

00:11:54 Andrew Keen: Was this a modern word at least in the late eighteenth century? The old word, oppression, of course, was also used in the later French revolution, sometimes not always to the best of ends. Is this, are words like oppression in the eighteenth century very modern word? Or were these words used historically for many hundreds of years? Maybe I know you're also a historian of it. The indigenous peoples of North America may be used before the Europeans even showed up.

00:12:24 Sarah Pearsall: I mean, I think oppression, takes on a particular kind of, force and, emphasis in this period of, especially, the mid to late eighteenth century. Many people in part start to see connections between British, increased power of the British Empire due to their, incredible success in the Seven Years War. They're taking over a lot of new territory, including some of these colonies like Canada. And that is something that sort of makes people, really think more about oppression and I think use it, in a lot of different kinds of contexts. So there are protests in London. There are protests in Asia. There are protests in America, and oppression is a word that appears sort of in all of those settings, in a kind of British imperial register. So I think it is something that people are really, feeling much more palpably in this period than they had done before.

00:13:36 Andrew Keen: What was the role of somebody like Thomas Paine in your narrative, this world history? Of course, Paine is very much bound up not just for the history of the American, but the French Revolution. Was Paine one of the scribes of the American Revolution as a kind of world revolution, or maybe I'm putting it?

00:13:55 Sarah Pearsall: I mean, I think he's a very important figure. And, of course, he's English himself and, you know, has a very transatlantic and even kind of global sensibility. And some of his arguments in Common Sense are about, you know, the fundamental absurdity of a small island kind of controlling larger territory in other continents. So he does definitely have a sense of that bigger world. And I think there are other connections with Paine, that a sort of widened perspective helps us to see better. So for example, there's been a debate among historians about, the extent to which Paine's Common Sense, which came out in January 1776, how much effect it had on sort of putting people in an independence mindset because it is arguing for American independence, which obviously does follow on in July of that year. But partly what I discovered is that part of the reason that Paine's arguments landed so much in that early 1776 is actually because of things that were happening in Canada. And Americans were really, pretty convinced that Canadians would join the rebellion, and some of them refer to things like the fourteenth province. And they're assuming, rightly, that there are many French Canadians in particular who are not particularly keen on British authority. It had only, sort of come into effect in the 1760s, and it is a sort of novel and, perplexing and sort of, challenging regime for French Catholics. So, in fact, there's many people even in Canada who think it's plausible that there will be an alliance with the American cause. And there are people there are French Canadians who go door to door, women, including women who go door to door sort of, rallying support for what are called the lower colonies. And it looks pretty good. Continental Congress in mid 1775 sends a letter to Canada. They have it translated into French. They distribute a thousand copies of it. They're very really trying to get broker an alliance. But to kind of really confirm that alliance, they also decide to send the Continental Army to just ensure that they conquer Canada and bring Canada into the fold. They initially are successful. They take Montreal, but then they try to besiege Quebec in December 1775. It's quite a dramatic story because they end up, trying to do it on the last day of 1775 because the terms of their soldiers is about to expire. And that means that they launch a siege of Quebec City, during a blizzard, the worst possible situation, also during a smallpox pandemic, which is really affecting their malnourished soldiers very much. So this, leads to an absolute disaster, and it's partly in the wake of this really, huge defeat of the Americans in Quebec and the loss of their general, Richard Montgomery. It's in that context that Tom Paine's arguments in common sense really land, because people are feeling like something has got to change because what the Americans are doing is clearly not working in Canada. So that's partly what I mean about sort of widening the frame. I think we don't understand the effect of Tom Paine's common sense as well if we don't pull back to that wider world and think about places like Canada in late 1775, early 1776.

00:17:55 Andrew Keen: Thinking about events in theatrical terms or using theatrical metaphors, I know eighteenth century thinkers, writers did it. The participants, the players in this drama, thinking of particularly people like Franklin and Jefferson Yeah. Did they imagine that they were participating on the world stage? They were very well connected, of course, in Europe.

00:18:20 Sarah Pearsall: Absolutely. I mean, Ben Franklin, of course, is, a very globally minded person. He is really nurturing a lot of connections, especially with European philosophes and others in France and elsewhere. He is a kind of global network of intellectuals he's certainly part of. And, absolutely, there is a sense that this is a kind of world event, and I think we see some of that in the language of the declaration about the sort of healthy respect for the opinions of mankind and sort of thinking about how people in the world are thinking about Americans and what they're doing. And it's certainly something that affects the way that politics play out, in terms of especially brokering alliances with the French. Obviously, Franklin is central to that, alliance brokering. It takes a while. They send Franklin in 1776 to France. He is already, a very beloved figure in France for his scientific work and intellectual work.

00:19:31 Andrew Keen: And he liked the ladies, didn't he, Benjamin Franklin?

00:19:34 Sarah Pearsall: And he liked the ladies and the ladies liked him. And more than one French woman talks about how appealing he is, this well fed farmer, as they put it, who pitches up without a wig. He wears his own hair, which is kind of gray and limp, and he wears a simple brown suit like a sort of Quaker. And he really plays up the sort of raw American. He wears a beaver hat. He has his famous bifocal spectacles, and this look becomes a very hot look, in France to the extent that, in fact, French men begin to wear these beaver hats themselves. French women get their hair and wigs done a la Franklin, the so that it is in the shape of the beaver hat. And he becomes really a kind of great point of fashion in this period. Nevertheless, despite the popularity that he has with many French people, especially French intellectuals, it takes a while to broker the alliance. And in fact, the French don't join in full alliance until early 1778. So part of '76, all of '77, the beginning, it takes a long time for Franklin and his, other diplomats who are less skilled, to be honest, than Franklin. None of them are actually terrific diplomats, and none of them actually speak French even all that well. But nevertheless, it does takes a while, but they do, of course, get there. And, the sense that they are working on a kind of world stage and that the French are sort of part of that is certainly, driving a lot of their thinking in this period.

00:21:22 Andrew Keen: Sarah, I know the book covers a lot of ground. You go to India. You go to Canada. You go to islands in the Pacific. But were the people watching this revolution or thinking about it in terms of some sort of global historical event? Did they maybe I'm being a bit unfair here, but did they recognize that the fact that the revolution was being supported and perhaps financed from France, which was an equally reactionary colonial state in some ways, perhaps more reactionary and colonial than Britain. Did they recognize that?

00:21:59 Sarah Pearsall: They absolutely did recognize it, and there's, a lot of trepidation about that alliance. It is not an obvious one, and that's one of the points that I draw out in the book. The French are Catholic in the face of an a very hot sort of Protestant in New England, who really is pro rebellion in most cases. It is also the most sort of regime. It is a very king focused, monarch focused, hierarchical system, not at all in sort of inclined to an anti deferential or Republican kind of mode. And it is not at all an obvious alliance. And in fact, the British and loyalists also kind of mock Americans for, you know, it for joining this alliance with their supposed kind of ancient enemy. Of course, American colonists had also been recently fighting the French in the Seven Years War, long standing enemies considered enemies of British people and British colonists. So it's a really unlikely kind of alliance. And partly, you know, an alliance with Canada, with French Canadian, that makes more sense than alliance with France and its king and its very rigid kind of hierarchical court system. Nevertheless, of course, that is the one that comes to prevail. And I think thinking about the contingency of that, thinking about the reasons that takes place, is worth our time. And, of course, it's very strongly connected with their mutual hatred of the British.

00:23:52 Andrew Keen: So in the celebrations, of course, the American Revolution will be seen in mostly positive historical terms. How was it seen at the time from India through The Pacific to Canada? Can one argue, I mean, in some ways, perhaps rather like 1917, that it was seen as the beginning of some sort of world revolution from outside America, from the streets, from the field, so to speak?

00:24:18 Sarah Pearsall: I mean, I think to some degree that's true, and I think, you know, the sort of interest in Franklin and the Americans in places like France is, indicative that there's something compelling and interesting about this new way of being. And, of course, it will ultimately have, you know, larger effects on France and its revolution, on Haiti and its revolution, on Latin American revolutions. But part of what I really try to emphasize in my book, I'd say most people have been aware of the sort of American revolution having an effect on these other revolutions and having an effect on the world in that respect. But partly what was really more interesting and certainly not really covered in this way that I do here is to really think about the effect of the world on the American Revolution and its course and progress and to try to think about different places, including places in West Africa, in China, in other places in terms of, affecting that revolution and the early years of The US nation and how it develops. So, I think it's a kind of going both ways. It's a two way street even though Americans have much more commonly been keen to emphasize the influence of their own influence in the world, but I think we wanna think about the other direction of travel too.

00:25:49 Andrew Keen: From Africa to China, are there generalizations one can make in your research, in your writing?

00:25:56 Sarah Pearsall: I mean, I think, you know, the overall generalization is that these places have an effect, that Americans are thinking about their place in the world, that sort of behavior of especially powerful people in those places, and an American desire to sort of be part of this world player, you know, to be a world player, is, you know, I think we can sort of see commonalities. Of course, as a historian, I'm also interested in exploring those specific contexts and sort of how and why they sort of shape behavior, in particular moments. And there's a kind of chronological development in my story from, you know, early protests in the 1760s to the development of the constitution and The US nation in the 1780s. So, you know, I would wanna sort of think a little bit about the generalities, but also really think about sort of specific moments and particular kinds of contingencies that affect, the course of the American Revolution itself.

00:27:07 Andrew Keen: I know you write about Anomabu in Ghana, many other places. Is there a particular anecdote that somehow captures the spirit of the book, freedom around the world?

00:27:20 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I mean, that's an interesting question. Partly, I mean, obviously, there are a lot of moments. One thing that became interesting to me in thinking about Anomabu, that's an area that's a trading castle that the British, control in West Africa, but it's not exactly under British control. It's also, really coming out of an alliance between local West Africans and the British. And the British are really not able to establish the same kinds of colonial inroads because of the power of these West African rulers, which are also transforming life in West Africa in this period in a way that is, both supported by and supporting this larger Transatlantic slave trade. And partly thinking about those transformations and the ways that those affect the story, became very interesting to me. And one of the things I do is focus both on an individual who is enslaved, a boy who was taken, who we know was at Anomabu in the 1760s, and, you know, is brought to New England and joins the household of a New England minister, and sort of thinking about, you know, that his story and sort of how that plays out in the American Revolution, became very interesting. He ends up, really, I think, persuading his enslaver ultimately to liberate him, which he does during the American Revolution, partly because of kind of, an increased critical stance towards slavery even in places like Newport, Rhode Island, which is a very central part very central, entrepot for, actually, the Transatlantic slave trade, and thinking about his trajectory and sort of how that changes. But he ultimately ends up indenturing his own son to that minister, because of sort of economic challenges of the 1780s. And it helps us, I think, to sort of see this wider framework to sort of see how that, set of transformations takes place.

00:29:41 Andrew Keen: Most Americans now associate the word Pontiac with cars coming out of Detroit, but the character Pontiac is quite different in your book. You, introduce him as an important Native American, leader. What about the indigenous communities of North America? Sarah, you're a scholar of the continent. How do they play into your narrative in freedom around the globe?

00:30:12 Sarah Pearsall: So they're very important players. And partly, I really thank you for asking me about that because I think, too often in sort of the historiography of the American Revolution, they've either been sort of left out or sidelined, or, you know, they're sort of considered almost as domestic dependence or, sort of, you know, playing into this larger, story that's mainly about the settlers and the British. But in fact, if we think of indigenous nations as what they actually were, which was separate international players, then I think we have to really reckon with their power, which was considerable in this period and which was quite distinct from either settler or British sort of ways of proceeding. And, of course, indigenous nations are many and varied. There are different languages and cultures. It's a huge variety. But on the other hand, there are certain moments that are very important, and I think Pontiac's War in the 1760s is one of them. And in fact, that's where I start the book, because in the aftermath of the Seven Years' War, which ends with the Treaty of Paris in 1763, a number of, sort of changes have taken place, including the sort of British takeover of areas and forts that had previously been under French jurisdiction. And those include places in the Great Lakes, like what becomes Detroit, which is begun as a French, trading fort in this area, surrounded by multiple indigenous nations. And partly, I think we can see with Pontiac's War, which is, an indigenous uprising against the British, trying to sort of ensure a different way of behavior on the part of the British who are, much less diplomatically suave than the French had been, are much, more kind of, my way or the highway in their sort of way of being. And that provokes this response, not just from Pontiac, but from a real, confederation of different indigenous nations. And they really launched, I would say, you know, among sort of early American, resistance to this British empire. And I think we can see this connected with a sort of rising resistance in The Americas to British power. But at the same time, it also is something that ends up, the British end up sort of making certain concessions ultimately to sort of, quiet things down, especially in what they see as sort of the Western frontier. And, this leads partly to, settler violence because settlers are, in many cases, upset that they're being constrained from moving west, from taking these lands from indigenous people. And, that's one of the sort of complaints that people have, that sort of play into their willingness to resist the British Empire. And I think, you know, you mentioned earlier this sort of darker roots of our US nation and sort of the problems of patriotism, I think we have to reckon with the fact that settler violence is really baked into that founding moment. And I think we need to really think hard about that.

00:33:58 Andrew Keen: Some people might bring to mind Gaza and the situation there. Sarah, you've written and then, your last book, I think, was called Polygamy An early American history. Polyamory, of course, has suddenly become rather fashionable. [The book's title is Polygamy: An Early American History; polyamory is a separate, distinct concept.] Would it be fair to say I mean, the conventional American European narrative is that the settlers brought these enlightenment ideas to America about democracy and freedom and ownership of land, etcetera, installed it there. But does your narrative and there are other narratives like this suggest that the American Revolution actually incorporated many native ideas, principles, which have been baked into the American Republic, into its culture, sometimes knowingly, sometimes unknowingly.

00:34:51 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I mean, partly what really interested me in the polygamy project was the sort of connection between marriage and, colonialism, marriage, and sort of ideas of cultural and religious superiority. And I think, you know, we see that sort of set of connections that continues. And I think, you know, certainly, the place of indigenous nations, the power of indigenous nations in this period is really manifest to American revolutionaries, and it is a point of great concern for them. So in another chapter, I talk about the continental army's decision to move into Haudenosaunee, country to the land of the six nations, which include Mohawks, Oneidas, and others, some of whom had allied with the British and but in fact, some of whom had allied with the Americans. But regardless, there is a sort of military campaign, series of military campaigns in 1779 in particular that, really bring kind of American, violence into that place in, really quite shocking ways, including the kind of burning and decimation of crops and houses and, forcing essentially most Haudenosaunee people to flee for their lives. And that, you know, is a kind of moment where I think, you know, we see really powerfully, the importance of indigenous nations to that story.

00:36:30 Andrew Keen: What can we learn about the current situation in America from your book Freedom Around the Globe? Seems to me That America is very complicated and ironic or paradoxical relationship with globalization. Of course, the current American administration, strongly nationalist, strongly opposed, organizations like the United Nations. But the UN was created by globalists like Anna, Eleanor Roosevelt, of course, formed in 1945 in my hometown, San Francisco. What does your narrative tell us about this peculiar relationship in America between American nationalists, American the American idea or promise of exceptionalism And American, internationalism and America as a symbol of the world itself.

00:37:31 Sarah Pearsall: I mean, I think, you know, partly what was very important to me in doing this book was to, counter the idea that this is an exclusively American story or that the founding fathers are exclusively kind of American minded, people. In fact, they were, in many cases, much more cosmopolitan, and much more globally minded than some of our current, leaders. I would say much more

00:38:03 Andrew Keen: Are you suggesting our current leaders aren't cosmopolitan, Sarah?

00:38:06 Sarah Pearsall: I'm suggesting that their priority is much more about America first, and more about American citizens than thinking about citizens of the world as a kind of,

00:38:20 Andrew Keen: Yeah. I'm teasing you, of course.

00:38:22 Sarah Pearsall: Idea. And I think that, you know, is something that many of the founders would have been quite surprised by, because people like Franklin and others are deeply connected. Jefferson, others are really part of these intellectual networks, are really interested in being part of that world. Of course, they have their many flaws, their many limitations, but nevertheless, they have a kind of cosmopolitan vision. They have a sense of America on a world stage. They have a sense of the world as a kind of really important set of connections, of a context for The US. They have a sense that other places are important and the opinion of other countries really matters. They're particularly keen to get, you know, favorable ratings from the British in the 1780s, and beyond. And, you know, I think we still see a sort of weird, you know, American interest in the royal family and other things that, you know, come out of this kind of colonial, post colonial moment. And, you know, I think partly what I wanted to do was to really restore that set of wider connections that are too often alighted in what has been, you know, a fairly patriotic nationalist, even sometimes arguably kind of provincial, way of thinking about the revolution. And, I mean, certainly, there has been scholarship for decades that has focused on these global connections, focused on diplomacy and the global war that comes out of this revolution. But I think in a lot of, you know, sort of, popular understandings and sort of text book understandings of the American Revolution. It's very easy to forget anything except the French alliance. And there were many more connections with a wide array of places, and that's what I try to sort of cover in this book.

00:40:28 Andrew Keen: Couple more questions. I know you're you've been very generous with your time. You're just back from Europe. You've just been, talking about the book in Germany. What's the reception there? Are people jumping on this to prove America's globalizing role in the world? Do they use it as a whipping as a as an opportunity to whip Hegseth and Trump and the MAGA crowd? What's your take on how your book is going down outside America in the same way as the American Revolution went down outside America?

00:41:05 Sarah Pearsall: Well, I mean, I actually have been extremely heartened by the reaction in Europe. Before I was in Germany, I was in Great Britain. I spoke at the Hay Literary Festival, which is the largest literary festival in Britain. And I spoke to an audience of a sold out audience of 1,700 people about this book and this topic. And there was a lot of solidarity. I think partly people around the world, not just Americans, are really baffled and horrified by what's going on in a lot of ways and, really seeking answers to understand, how and why The US looks and behaves as it does, to understand the sort of deeper roots of the connections between The US and the world. And I was enormously, gratified, delighted, honored, and humbled by the sort of interest that a lot of people in Britain and Germany had about these questions, and with their sympathies for, many of us in The US who are equally perplexed and horrified by what's going on and trying to sort of make sense of it as best we can. And I think, you know, I really would emphasize and all of the work that I have done as a scholar has emphasized that, you know, The US needs to be put in context of the wider world that things that don't necessarily make sense if you only look at The US side, but rather take a broader view and think about a sort of wider set of connections, we see things more clearly. We see both those wider global connections, and we see local dynamics more clearly. So it's not that it's an either or. In fact, I think taking a wider perspective helps us to see The US story as well as these wider connections. And I've been really delighted that audiences in Europe, as well as in The US have been interested in this story and this set of connections.

00:43:29 Andrew Keen: And then thinking more broadly in a historical sense, we did a show recently with Christopher Clark who's Written a wonderful book on the revolutions of 1848, all, of course, failed in contrast with 1776. When you talk about it more seems as if the best equivalent to 1776 is 1917 in Russia. What year, or what other revolutions can be comparable to the American Revolution?

00:43:56 Sarah Pearsall: Well, that's a really interesting question. And, actually, Chris Clark is a friend of mine, and we've spent many years together talking about revolution. I think revolutionary spring is just a remarkable

00:44:07 Andrew Keen: Yes. When well, you used to teach at Cambridge. So you were just colleague.

00:44:11 Sarah Pearsall: To teach at Cambridge, so we were colleagues. And, in fact, I just saw him on this recent trip. So that's I think, in fact, he would say those 1848 revolutions were not failures exactly. And, I think that's part of the force of his book. And his is also a kind of global minded book, and we've been really interested in thinking together about those global connections, though he's much sharper on them perhaps than I am. But in any case, I think, I mean, it's always, you know, interesting if challenging to sort of draw exact analogies. I mean, of course, the revolution that people had in their minds during the American Revolution was actually the British revolutions of the seventeenth century. And in a way, you know, of course, more violent in the killing of Charles, in 1649. But the idea of republicanism, the idea of, ending a system of monarchy, I think, actually, that's a set of connections that, was certainly playing into people's sense of what was going on in the American revolutionary period and I think is a reasonable, if obviously somewhat different comparison. I would say too that those British revolutions also hinged on events that were going on outside of England, including places like Scotland and Ireland. And I think thinking about that wider, sort of context is also, you know, would also make a sort of interesting analogy with the American Revolution. There may be others, but I think that was the one that was most salient to people during the American Revolution itself.

00:46:04 Andrew Keen: So finally, Sarah, let almost, just over a month until July 4 [the 250th anniversary]. Are you gonna be in Baltimore? How are you gonna celebrate independence 250 years later?

00:46:20 Sarah Pearsall: Yeah. I mean, it's a kind of amazing thing to think about. And, you know, obviously, there are a lot of, pretty interesting ideas for how to celebrate the 250th IndyCar races, our triumph, UFC wrestling matches at the White House. I personally will not be participating in any of those. I partly, think it's a moment for us to reflect on the state of The US nation and to think about its, deep roots in this revolutionary moment to sort of, really think about, those sort of long threads that tie, the sort of complications, the contradictions, the double edged nature, both aspirational to extraordinary beautiful ideals of life and liberty and happiness and equality, things that are in the declaration of independence, points that are have been emphasized ever since and that I think are still capable of stirring and uniting us. I think it's really worth our thinking about those, but I of course, this is within a context of also seeing the darker roots of, this creation of this nation, the violence and the limitations and the exclusions that have been sort of built into that. And I think reflecting on ways to move forward in a positive way is, you know, something that I hope. I also hope that people engage with the declaration of independence. It's a document that people know to be important, but frequently actually haven't ever read or haven't read that carefully or haven't read in thirty or forty years. And I think it's worth, reengaging with that. It's a really interesting, if, complicated, sometimes very disturbing, and sometimes really uplifting, kind of document to look at.

00:48:32 Andrew Keen: In other words, read the constitution [Pearsall clarifies it is the Declaration of Independence], don't watch the fireworks, or don't barbecue, don't go to the next the

00:48:37 Sarah Pearsall: declaration of independence. And they're two very different documents

00:48:41 Andrew Keen: What?

00:48:42 Sarah Pearsall: Coming out of quite different context. The declaration of independence is, much shorter. It's coming out of that 1776 moment. I think it has a very strong sense of the place of this new nation in the world. I think the constitution, which is several years later in the late 1780s and, you know, really trying to set up a how the US government will work, is a rather different document. You know, equally important, of course, but just, different. And I would love for people partly to really engage with the declaration itself, which is what this anniversary is about. Right? The publication of that declaration on 07/04/1776.

00:49:29 Andrew Keen: So there you have it. You got your reading list on July 4, declaration of independence. You might also pick up Sarah Pearsall's new book, Freedom Around the Globe. Sarah, thank you so much for giving us so much time. I know you're just back from Europe, but congratulations. The book's getting a lot of excellent press, and it's an important contribution to this complicated subject of the American Revolution.

00:49:53 Sarah Pearsall: Absolutely. Thank you so much for having me on. Really a pleasure to have this really fascinating conversation today. Thank you.