Pub Date : 2022-11-20DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2120254
Published in American Nineteenth Century History (Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)
发表于《美国十九世纪历史》(Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)
{"title":"Books Reviewed","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2120254","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2120254","url":null,"abstract":"Published in American Nineteenth Century History (Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138541783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-20DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2140507
Published in American Nineteenth Century History (Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)
发表于《美国十九世纪历史》(Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)
{"title":"Letter from the editors","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2140507","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2140507","url":null,"abstract":"Published in American Nineteenth Century History (Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138541817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-20DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2120240
Edward McInnis
Published in American Nineteenth Century History (Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)
发表于《美国十九世纪历史》(Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)
{"title":"American Mirror: The United States and Brazil in the Age of Emancipation","authors":"Edward McInnis","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2120240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2120240","url":null,"abstract":"Published in American Nineteenth Century History (Vol. 23, No. 2, 2022)","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138541801","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2165282
Ryan P. Semmes
ABSTRACT This article examines significant diplomatic moments during the Grant administration – the Cuban neutrality proclamation and the Treaty of Washington – and the methods employed by Secretary of State Hamilton Fish to manage diplomacy and to keep the United States out of war with Europe. It argues that Fish was a pragmatic adviser to the President, not a manipulator pushing Grant towards his own ends, or a savior pulling Grant back from disaster. Rather, Fish counseled Grant to make sound diplomatic decisions that insured peace, leading to greater autonomy in decision-making and a successful relationship between president and secretary of state.
{"title":"Counselor not savior: Hamilton Fish and foreign policy decision-making during the Grant administration","authors":"Ryan P. Semmes","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2165282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2165282","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines significant diplomatic moments during the Grant administration – the Cuban neutrality proclamation and the Treaty of Washington – and the methods employed by Secretary of State Hamilton Fish to manage diplomacy and to keep the United States out of war with Europe. It argues that Fish was a pragmatic adviser to the President, not a manipulator pushing Grant towards his own ends, or a savior pulling Grant back from disaster. Rather, Fish counseled Grant to make sound diplomatic decisions that insured peace, leading to greater autonomy in decision-making and a successful relationship between president and secretary of state.","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41794017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2161446
Timothy Compeau
of the
的
{"title":"Warfare and Logistics along the US-Canadian Border during the War of 1812","authors":"Timothy Compeau","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2161446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2161446","url":null,"abstract":"of the","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42873668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2161455
Natalie Yeo
claimed to do so “in accordance with the spirit that actuated the venerated fathers of the Republic” (p. 200). The abolitionist spirit of the Constitution, Gilhooley argues, emerged as a specific response to this proslavery logic and used the tools laid out by Black writers in the 1820s. The payoff of Gilhooley’s thesis becomes evident when he arrives at Roger Taney’s Dred Scott decision. Taney’s decision to anchor his ruling in tenuous assertions of what the founders must have meant, without a significant degree of textual support, has long puzzled historians. Now, it appears clearly as the culmination, or at least the most extreme version, of a twodecade-old proslavery intellectual project. There is, Gilhooley asserts, an additional legacy of these struggles that outlived the politics of slavery. We are stuck with the founders and their spirit, and therefore locked into a mode of constitutional politics that is “tilted toward conservatism” (p. 248). This reviewer was left wondering if Gilhooley’s work might also hold a different lesson. Does the antebellum struggle over slavery not show us that a politics driven by the spirit of the founding might powerfully support a range of political ends, progressive as well as conservative? Either way, skeptics and proponents of constitutional politics alike could not ask for a better starting point than this book.
{"title":"Borderland Blacks: Two Cities in the Niagara Region During the Final Decades of Slavery","authors":"Natalie Yeo","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2161455","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2161455","url":null,"abstract":"claimed to do so “in accordance with the spirit that actuated the venerated fathers of the Republic” (p. 200). The abolitionist spirit of the Constitution, Gilhooley argues, emerged as a specific response to this proslavery logic and used the tools laid out by Black writers in the 1820s. The payoff of Gilhooley’s thesis becomes evident when he arrives at Roger Taney’s Dred Scott decision. Taney’s decision to anchor his ruling in tenuous assertions of what the founders must have meant, without a significant degree of textual support, has long puzzled historians. Now, it appears clearly as the culmination, or at least the most extreme version, of a twodecade-old proslavery intellectual project. There is, Gilhooley asserts, an additional legacy of these struggles that outlived the politics of slavery. We are stuck with the founders and their spirit, and therefore locked into a mode of constitutional politics that is “tilted toward conservatism” (p. 248). This reviewer was left wondering if Gilhooley’s work might also hold a different lesson. Does the antebellum struggle over slavery not show us that a politics driven by the spirit of the founding might powerfully support a range of political ends, progressive as well as conservative? Either way, skeptics and proponents of constitutional politics alike could not ask for a better starting point than this book.","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46371577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2165277
A. Hammann
ABSTRACT For decades, historians of slavery have grappled with an interpretive constraint. Despite a conviction that the past is as complex as the present, we have operated, to a significant degree, on the simplifying premise that historical attitudes toward enslavement were either antislavery or proslavery—in modified form, immediatist/gradualist or perpetualist. These binary frames have undermined our efforts to write about, and in some ways to discern, attitudes that fell in the ambivalent middle. Through a case study of Henry Clay, one of the most influential politicians operating in this middle range, this article argues for the adoption of a new term, eventualism, that describes one of the most common expressions of ambivalence: declaring opposition to slavery while insisting that, for the sake of the Union, it be left alone and allowed to follow a natural course to extinction. By illustrating the benefits of a refined interpretive approach, immediatism-gradualism-eventualism-perpetualism, along with the benefits of certain interpretive principles that, if more widely adopted, will clarify and enhance inter-scholarly engagements, this article seeks to encourage and enable historians to continue the important work of explicating how and why many Americans, predominantly white Americans, espoused attitudes with significant internal tensions.
{"title":"Beyond antislavery and proslavery: a new term, eventualism, and a refined interpretive approach","authors":"A. Hammann","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2165277","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2165277","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For decades, historians of slavery have grappled with an interpretive constraint. Despite a conviction that the past is as complex as the present, we have operated, to a significant degree, on the simplifying premise that historical attitudes toward enslavement were either antislavery or proslavery—in modified form, immediatist/gradualist or perpetualist. These binary frames have undermined our efforts to write about, and in some ways to discern, attitudes that fell in the ambivalent middle. Through a case study of Henry Clay, one of the most influential politicians operating in this middle range, this article argues for the adoption of a new term, eventualism, that describes one of the most common expressions of ambivalence: declaring opposition to slavery while insisting that, for the sake of the Union, it be left alone and allowed to follow a natural course to extinction. By illustrating the benefits of a refined interpretive approach, immediatism-gradualism-eventualism-perpetualism, along with the benefits of certain interpretive principles that, if more widely adopted, will clarify and enhance inter-scholarly engagements, this article seeks to encourage and enable historians to continue the important work of explicating how and why many Americans, predominantly white Americans, espoused attitudes with significant internal tensions.","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48251126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2161566
Michael A. Hill
her fiction. An actual cousin to the progenitor of plantation fiction, Thomas Nelson Page, Rives coveted his approval and eventually found her writing mentioned in the same company as his. Memorable is Rives’s use of an image made in 1889 to telegraph her privilege. In the photograph, Rives reclines on a well-appointed sofa while over her stands a Black woman in a domestic uniform, her eyes downcast to Rives’s figure, her posture inclined as though ready to spring at the wishes of the recumbent figure. Censer’s caption labels the image as one expressly taken to show “how Amélie Rives portrayed herself as a Virginia aristocrat” (p. 171). Whether Rives and her publicist consciously engineered such a linkage or periodicals manufactured these opportunities, “the effect was the same: Rives was pictured as a benevolent southerner of the old school” (p. 170). Rives thus illustrates the troublesome “benevolence” of progressive white womanhood, eager to explode the boundaries of circumscribed femininity, unwilling to disentangle those same freedoms from the net of whiteness. Censer finds Rives’s better formulated work later in her career when she relies less heavily on tired formulas of regional exceptionalism. InWorld’s-End (1914), she explores the toll of premarital pregnancy, for instance, and Shadows of Flames (1915) takes up opiate addiction. Here and earlier Censer maintains that Rives focused “on the passion, insouciance, and capabilities of her female protagonists” (p. 260). Rives emerged as something of a mentor to younger southern writers and enjoyed a friendship with fellow Virginian Ellen Glasgow, who famously exposed the treacheries of what she called “evasive idealism” in novels including The Sheltered Life (1932). Censer’s study may not so much engender a new generation of Rives devotees as it may instead redirect readers to how southern literature evolved in concert with a national literary marketplace. For her own part, Rives was chronically dissatisfied with her literary efforts, admitting in 1932 to a biographer she forcefully discouraged “I haven’t any illusions about myself as to my writing” (p. 251). If Rives had reservations about her own skill, readers will have none about Censer’s. The Princess of Albemarle is the fullest portrait of Rives’s life and work to date; it opens a window onto a period of American letters in which writing from the South seems simultaneously out of step with national rhythms and revelatory of their deepest impulses.
{"title":"Oceans of Grain: How American Wheat Remade the World","authors":"Michael A. Hill","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2161566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2161566","url":null,"abstract":"her fiction. An actual cousin to the progenitor of plantation fiction, Thomas Nelson Page, Rives coveted his approval and eventually found her writing mentioned in the same company as his. Memorable is Rives’s use of an image made in 1889 to telegraph her privilege. In the photograph, Rives reclines on a well-appointed sofa while over her stands a Black woman in a domestic uniform, her eyes downcast to Rives’s figure, her posture inclined as though ready to spring at the wishes of the recumbent figure. Censer’s caption labels the image as one expressly taken to show “how Amélie Rives portrayed herself as a Virginia aristocrat” (p. 171). Whether Rives and her publicist consciously engineered such a linkage or periodicals manufactured these opportunities, “the effect was the same: Rives was pictured as a benevolent southerner of the old school” (p. 170). Rives thus illustrates the troublesome “benevolence” of progressive white womanhood, eager to explode the boundaries of circumscribed femininity, unwilling to disentangle those same freedoms from the net of whiteness. Censer finds Rives’s better formulated work later in her career when she relies less heavily on tired formulas of regional exceptionalism. InWorld’s-End (1914), she explores the toll of premarital pregnancy, for instance, and Shadows of Flames (1915) takes up opiate addiction. Here and earlier Censer maintains that Rives focused “on the passion, insouciance, and capabilities of her female protagonists” (p. 260). Rives emerged as something of a mentor to younger southern writers and enjoyed a friendship with fellow Virginian Ellen Glasgow, who famously exposed the treacheries of what she called “evasive idealism” in novels including The Sheltered Life (1932). Censer’s study may not so much engender a new generation of Rives devotees as it may instead redirect readers to how southern literature evolved in concert with a national literary marketplace. For her own part, Rives was chronically dissatisfied with her literary efforts, admitting in 1932 to a biographer she forcefully discouraged “I haven’t any illusions about myself as to my writing” (p. 251). If Rives had reservations about her own skill, readers will have none about Censer’s. The Princess of Albemarle is the fullest portrait of Rives’s life and work to date; it opens a window onto a period of American letters in which writing from the South seems simultaneously out of step with national rhythms and revelatory of their deepest impulses.","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47247369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2167296
Matthew Hill
ABSTRACT Prior to the passage in 1862 of the Homestead Act, much of the West was settled by squatters—settlers with no legal claim to the land they lived and worked on but who claimed it as their own. They often used democratically elected claims associations to facilitate their expansion into the West, and while they were not directly connected to the U.S. state, also cannot be thought of as completely separate from it. Like filibusters and conspirators, they sought to advance what they perceived as American interests, although they were not officially sanctioned to do so by the federal government.
{"title":"“They are not surpassed … by an equal number of citizens of any equal country in the world”: squatter society in the American West","authors":"Matthew Hill","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2167296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2167296","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Prior to the passage in 1862 of the Homestead Act, much of the West was settled by squatters—settlers with no legal claim to the land they lived and worked on but who claimed it as their own. They often used democratically elected claims associations to facilitate their expansion into the West, and while they were not directly connected to the U.S. state, also cannot be thought of as completely separate from it. Like filibusters and conspirators, they sought to advance what they perceived as American interests, although they were not officially sanctioned to do so by the federal government.","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47385931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/14664658.2022.2161453
Evan Turiano
The reader is left wanting to see the comparison drawn out further. The result is that references to the 1822 uprising feel somewhat tacked on in order to make certain essays relevant to the volume, whereas their purpose is to demonstrate longer and interconnected legacies of resistance across time and place. Another reason to read the essays together is that the anthology lets interpretation of evidence that conflicts between authors stand with no explanation or contextualization of the differences, leaving the reader to critically compare accounts and derive their own conclusions. Sometimes these conflicting interpretations of a single detail can lead to vastly different takes on the uprising. For example, Bernard Powers claims Vesey may have been born on St. Thomas, and that his proximity to (and subsequent brief residence in) Haiti enabled him to make contacts with Haiti’s Black residents and absorb revolutionary values; in contrast, Spady asserts Vesey may have been Kormantse, hailing from the Ghanaian coast or further inland, and thus drew uponWest African politics and culture in his articulation and organization of collective rebellion. Spady cites evidence that Vesey was then taken to the Caribbean as a teenager and purchased by Joseph Vesey in St. Thomas before briefly residing in Haiti, then Charleston. Powers gives heavy weight to the Haitian influence on the 1822 uprising; Spady names it as one among many influences that might have inspired a few resistors. Readers are left to discern what to take from these interpretations. The editor or authors could have noted such contradictions by referencing the murky and fragmented nature of the archives, as Robert Paquette’s essay does, to demonstrate that the available evidence points to either of these birthplaces. In all, Fugitive Movements is a timely and necessary collection that adeptly interweaves historical scholarship and memory studies to advance understanding of the long legacy of Black resistance evident in the 1822 uprising and the Black freedom struggles that have endured to this day.
{"title":"The Antebellum Origins of the Modern Constitution: Slavery and the Spirit of the American Founding","authors":"Evan Turiano","doi":"10.1080/14664658.2022.2161453","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664658.2022.2161453","url":null,"abstract":"The reader is left wanting to see the comparison drawn out further. The result is that references to the 1822 uprising feel somewhat tacked on in order to make certain essays relevant to the volume, whereas their purpose is to demonstrate longer and interconnected legacies of resistance across time and place. Another reason to read the essays together is that the anthology lets interpretation of evidence that conflicts between authors stand with no explanation or contextualization of the differences, leaving the reader to critically compare accounts and derive their own conclusions. Sometimes these conflicting interpretations of a single detail can lead to vastly different takes on the uprising. For example, Bernard Powers claims Vesey may have been born on St. Thomas, and that his proximity to (and subsequent brief residence in) Haiti enabled him to make contacts with Haiti’s Black residents and absorb revolutionary values; in contrast, Spady asserts Vesey may have been Kormantse, hailing from the Ghanaian coast or further inland, and thus drew uponWest African politics and culture in his articulation and organization of collective rebellion. Spady cites evidence that Vesey was then taken to the Caribbean as a teenager and purchased by Joseph Vesey in St. Thomas before briefly residing in Haiti, then Charleston. Powers gives heavy weight to the Haitian influence on the 1822 uprising; Spady names it as one among many influences that might have inspired a few resistors. Readers are left to discern what to take from these interpretations. The editor or authors could have noted such contradictions by referencing the murky and fragmented nature of the archives, as Robert Paquette’s essay does, to demonstrate that the available evidence points to either of these birthplaces. In all, Fugitive Movements is a timely and necessary collection that adeptly interweaves historical scholarship and memory studies to advance understanding of the long legacy of Black resistance evident in the 1822 uprising and the Black freedom struggles that have endured to this day.","PeriodicalId":41829,"journal":{"name":"American Nineteenth Century History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41604683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：