Paine overstated colonial self-sufficiency while arguing unity outweighed British numbers

Evidence

With only the rudiments of a Continental Navy composed largely of privateers and facing a near-mythical British one, Paine took a relative tack to assessing sea forces. “Ship-building is America’s greatest pride,” he writes. “No country on the globe is so happily situated, or so internally capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage are her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing.” Beyond this, Paine adds, “From a mixture of prejudice and inattention, we have contracted a false notion respecting the Navy of England.” He gives two bald reasons without offering evidence to support them. “The English list of ships of war, is long and formidable, but not a tenth part of them are at any one time fit for service,” Paine claims, “and not a fifth part of such as are fit for service, can be spared on any one station at one time. The East, and West Indies, Mediterranean, Africa, and another parts over which Britain extends her claim, make large demands on her Navy.” Bolstering this argument, in a third edition of Common Sense published on February 14, 1776, Paine adds some rough calculations suggesting that Congress could readily afford to build enough ships to counter the Royal Navy. … Beyond assessing land and sea forces, Paine recites various “abilities” that colonists can leverage to support separation. “In almost every article of defence we abound,” he observes, naming iron ore for cannons, saltpeter for gunpowder, hemp for cordage, timber, tar, small arms, food, and fiber but without noting that the colonies often lacked the means to turn these raw materials into usable products. At the time, for example, the Continental Army suffered such a critical lack of gunpowder that it discontinued ceremonial musket fire and officers issued spears to soldiers for use in case of a British attack. … As added assets, Paine cites both the wealth of unoccupied land available to pay for the war effort and the men available for war service due to British restrictions on American commerce. “The diminution of trade affords an army, and the necessities of an army creates a new trade,” he explains. For Paine, however, with less of everything than the British, the colonists must stand together. “We are young, and have been distressed,” he writes, which unites the colonies. “’Tis not in numbers but in unity that our great strength lies,” he says of the American people. “We are sufficiently numerous, and were we more so, we might be less united.” — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 89

Categorization

• XREF: Paine’s overclaiming of colonial resources without noting conversion limits mirrors how the Declaration’s rhetorical force sometimes outpaced material realities — connects to the course’s treatment of founding documents as persuasive founding acts. — connects to: Paine’s Common Sense reframed colonial resistance as a revolution for independence.; Paine saw economic inequality as natural but king-subject distinction as unnatural — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 53

Broader Connections

• Paine’s Common Sense reframed colonial resistance as a revolution for independence. #expands (0.85)
• Paine saw economic inequality as natural but king-subject distinction as unnatural #expands (0.75) — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 53