The Great Awakening: An Historical Analysis

The Great Awakening: An Historical Analysis Author(s): Robert D. Rossel Source: The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 75, No. 6 (May, 1970), pp. 907-925 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: Accessed: 27/08/2010 01:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Journal of Sociology.



The GreatAwakening:An HistoricalAnalysis

RobertD. Rossel SouthernIllinois University

The Great Awakening(a period of intensereligiousrevivalismbetween 1730 and 1745) is analyzed as a mechanismof social change. Even priorto the revivaltherewerestrainsin Americanreligionas well as politicstowardgreaterindividualism,voluntarism,and democracy.The latentfunctionof the revivalwas to preparethe way forthisnew formof social order.As the structurebegan yieldingto the increasedpressurestowardindividualism,the revival served as a dynamicagentclearingawaymanyoftheideologicaland institutional trappingsthatwereblockingthistransformation.

The periodofreligiousrevivalfallingbetweenthe years 1730 and 1745 in PuritanNew Englandis one ofextremechangein social organizationT. he task ofthispaperwillbe to analyzethe GreatAwakeningas a mechanism ofsocial change.In one sense,therevivalwas symptomaticoftheextreme functionalincompatibilitybetween New England's dominant religiouspoliticalinstitutionalorderand its emergentdifferentiateedconomicand social substructureT. he intensityand magnitudeoftherevivalwas indicativeofstrainsinherentin an attemptto maintaina religious-politicaolrder whichwas basicallyincompatiblewiththematerialconditionsofa colonial frontierenvironmentT.he latentfunctionoftherevivalwas to preparethe wayfora moraland socialordermorein keepingwiththesematerialconditionsby clearingaway manyoftheideologicaland institutionatlrappings that servedto maintainthe establishmentof religionand its dominance ofthepolityand theeconomy.In so doing,therevivalgave greatimpetus to a dispositiontowardindividualismv, oluntarisma,nd democracyalready at workin and aroundNew England.

The generalline of the theoreticalargumentin this analysiswill be as follows:

1. New England Puritantheocracyinvolveda medievalconceptionof authorityand was "mechanical"in its solidarity.

2. Isolationand theextremehardshipsinvolvedinsurvivalservedinitiallytomaintaintheimposedconceptionofauthorityand systemofsolidarity.

3. The same challengeof adaptation coupled with a strongCalvinist workethictended to encourageheightenedinstrumentaalctivityon the partofthe colonists.

4. ThroughtheseactivitiesNew England developedan increasinglyviable commerciael conomythatextendedherinvolvementin thetotalcolo-

907

AmericanJournalofSociology

nial economy,ended her isolation,and renderedher theocraticsystemof solidarityincreasinglyinapplicable.

5. A numberofintegrativeproblemsdevelopedwhichweresymptomatic ofrisingdissensionwithinNew England.

6. Class antagonismsand regionalhostilitiesincreasedand both contributedto and weresymptomaticofrisingconflictand strainwithinNew England.

7. The Great Awakeningwas a socio-emotionalreactionto the rising dissensionand strainwithinNew England.

8. Though manifestlythe Great Awakeningappeared reactive-a desperate attempton the part of the traditionaliststo reestablishthe older theocraticmoralorder-its latentfunctionwas to destroythe old order, thus makingit possiblefora sectarianand denominationalpatternmore commensuratwe ithdemocraticpluralismto emerge.

The theoreticalmodelforthe analysisis providedby Bales (1962, pp. 127-28) whenhe states:

Looking at large scale systemsin a very abstract way, one can forman idea of ptitwrsootcee"recmdhiaininngasilneofoffpeepcvotessntiettnes"ddiionrrgec"ttsoieosrneietss,otoeffnftdshtinergaoitpnops"ocsasinttacereclthienaaigcnhfroooftmehveoerpnpotuosst. i,Otaennepdocleheasacihnanoidnf events has its startingpoint in the necessitiesofadaptation to the outer situation and proceedsin itsseriesofstrainsthroughchangesin thedivisionoflabor, changes in the distributionof property,authority,and status and has its malintegrative terminaleffectsin the disturbance of the existingstate of solidarity. The other chain of events has its startingpoint in the necessitiesof integrationor reintegration of the social systemitselfand proceeds in its seriesof strainsthrougha reactive . . . emphasis on solidaritywhich exertsa dissolving,undermining,equalizing, or curbingeffecton the differentiadl istributionof status, on differencesin authority,differencesin the division of labor with an ultimate terminal effect that may be maladaptive.

Bales's discussionseemsto have greatrelevancein consideringtheevents leadingup to the GreatAwakening.The explosivenessofthe revivaloriginated in the tensionbetweenthe adaptive strainsof a frontiersituation and a traditionalmoralorderimposedon such a situation.Bales's model has foundwide applicationin the generalactiontheoryofParsons and, as such,has had itsgreatestuse in thefunctionaalnalysisofinstitutionaslubsystemsofsocietyand theproblemsofsocial integrationratherthansocial change(see Parsons 1951;Parsonsand Shils 1951; Parsonset al. 1955;Parsons and Smelser1956). However,therelevanceofthismodelfortheanalysis of change in social systemshas also been demonstratedin much of theworkofParsonsand Bales (see Parsons,Shils,and Bales 1953; Parsons 1960).1Of specificrelevanceto thismodel as it is applied in this analysis is Boskoff'sattemptto systematicallyapply a structural-functionpael r-

1 Though space does not permitan extensivereviewof this aspect of Parsons' work,nor is it particularlyappropriate at this point, the influenceof this body of theoryon the present work must be acknowledged.

908

The GreatAwakening spective to the study of social change (Boskoff1964, esp. pp. 218-25). David Lockwood's distinctionbetween"social" or "normative"integrationand "system"integrationhelpsto clarifysomeofthelatentinstitutional and structuraleffectsof the Awakening(Lockwood 1964,pp. 250-53). Thoughmuchofthisanalysisfocuseson thelack ofnormativeintegration resultingfromconfusionin the corenormsand values ofthe dominantreligiousinstitutiont,heproblemofnormativeintegrationis analyzedas dependenton a moregeneralproblemofsystemintegrationt,hatis,thedegree of articulationbetweenthe normativepatternsdictated by the religious institutionand the materialconditionsand emergentstructuralarrangementsdictatedby the harshrealitiesof lifein a colonialenvironmentA. s Lockwood (1964, p. 251) pointsout, "thereis nothingmetaphysicalabout thegeneralnotionofsocial relationshipsbeingsomehowimplicitin a given set ofmaterialconditions.Material conditionsmostobviouslyincludethe technologicalmeans of controlover the physicaland social environment and the skills associated with these means.... Such materialconditions mustsurelybe includedas a variablein any calculusofsystemintegration, sinceitis clearthat theymay facilitatethe developmentof 'deviant' social relationshipws hichruncounterto thedominantinstitutionpatternsofthe system."

In orderto get at someofthesespecificpoints,let us firstexaminesome ofthedescriptivematerialpertainingto thisperiodofhistoryt, hearea, the movement,and thepeopleinvolvedin it. Then we willturnto an examinationofthe GreatAwakeningas a mechanismofsocial change.

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE GREAT AWAKENING Most historiansdate thebeginningoftheGreatAwakeningfromtheNorthamptonrevivalwhichbegan in the churchof the greatPuritan minister JonathanEdwards in 1733,thoughactuallyit was a small ripplein comparisonwiththe greatwave that was to followin 1740 withthe ministry of GeorgeWhitefield.

Edwards was the grandsonof Solomon Stoddard, himselfa powerful ministerwho forsixtyyears had exerciseda profoundinfluenceover his congregationin Northamptonand the surroundingarea. In 1727 Edwards lefthis post as a tutorat Yale and joined his grandfatheirn his churchat NorthamptonI.n 1729 Stoddarddied,leavingthe post to Edwards.

DuringthelatteryearsofhislifeStoddardhad letthings"slip" inNorthampton,so the grandsonreports(Ferm 1953,p. 165). He states: "Licentiousnessforsome yearsgreatlyprevailedamongthe youthof the town; theywere many of themverymuch addicted to nightwalking,and frequentingthe tavern,and lewd practices,whereinsome by theirexample exceedinglycorruptedothers.It was theirmannerveryfrequentlyto get togetherin conventionsof both sexes, formirthand jollity,whichthey

909

AmericanJournalofSociology called frolicks;and theywould oftenspend the greaterpart of the night in themwithoutany regardto orderin the familiestheybelongedto; and indeedfamilygovernmentdid too muchfailin the town."

By 1732,however,therewas a markedchangein the religiousattitude ofhis people,especiallytheyoungpeople.Let us turnto Edwards' ownreport concerningThe SurprisingWorkof God in theConversionof Many HundredSouls in Northamnpt(osnee Ferm 1953,p. 166): "But twoor three yearsafterMr. Stoddard'sdeath,therebegan to be a sensibleamendment of theseevils. The youngpeople shewedmoreof a dispositionto hearken to council,and by degreesleftofftheirfrolics;theygrewobservablymore decentin theirattendanceon thepublicworship,and thereweremorewho manifesteda religiousconcernthan thereused to be." By 1733 Edwards noteda quickeningin theconcernofhis people about religion(Ferm 1953, p. 168): "a greatand ernestconcernabout thegreatthingsofreligion,and the eternalworld,became universalin all parts of the town,and among personsof all ages. The noise amongstthe dry bones waxed louder and louder[until]all othertalk but about spiritualand eternalthingswas soon thrownby." The concernforreligiongrewto such a pitchthat "worldly" affairswerein dangerofbeingignored(Ferm 1953,p. 169). "The mindsof the people were wonderfullytaken offfromthe world,it was treated amongstus as a thingofverylittleconsequence:Theyseem'dto followtheir worldlyBusiness,moreas a part oftheirDuty, thanfromany Disposition theyhad to it; the Temptationnow seemedto lie on thathand to neglect worldlyaffairstoo much,and spendtoo muchTime in theimmediateExercise of Religion."

Edwards continuesto reportthe mannerin whichthe revivalspread to othercommunitiesnot onlyin Massachusettsbut in Connecticut.According to Edwards's report,therewere great "stirrings"in at least twenty townsas the revivalfollowedthe ConnecticutRiveras it woundits course to the ocean.

These "ripples" of revivalin 1734-36 seemedto indicatea generaldispositiontowardreligiousawakeningin New England-a dispositionwhich wouldbe tapped to a muchgreaterdegreeby thedynamicitinerantministerGeorgeWhitefieldin 1740. It is in thissecond revivalthat we get an idea ofthe extentand intensityofthismass movement.

Whitefield'sjourneythroughNew England began at Newport,Rhode Island, September15, 1740.His twenty-four-dajoyurneytookhimalonga pathup thecoastfromNewporttoBostonandfromBostonto York,Maine, and back again alongthesame route(Gaustad 1957,p. 27).

Some notionof his generalimpact on the people will be gatheredby notinghow the attendancegrewin his two visitsin Boston. The Boston NewsLetter(see Gaustad 1957,p. 26) reportsofhis firstvisit: 910

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download