一个被奴隶制分裂的国家:在走向内战的同时铭记美国革命作者:迈克尔·f·科林(书评)

E. K. Cheng
{"title":"一个被奴隶制分裂的国家:在走向内战的同时铭记美国革命作者:迈克尔·f·科林(书评)","authors":"E. K. Cheng","doi":"10.1093/jahist/jaw398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"WINTER 2016 79 of the Panama Congress in 1826, Mueller asserts that Benton’s speech was a “critical turning point in the creation of master race democracy” (128). It seems like an odd moment to highlight as a watershed, and without more evidence the claim is not fully supported. Yet these sorts of minor quibbles are inevitable with any work and they do not undermine Mueller’s larger argument about nationalism and white supremacy. In light of Mueller’s decision to make master race democracy an organizing principle of the book, it is curious that the book does not engage a wider scholarship. There is only a glancing discussion of major works on race and democracy, and even those discussions tend to look at older works, such as Reginald Horseman’s Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial AngloSaxonism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986) For decades, scholars from George Fredrickson to James Oakes and Edward Baptist have debated the relationship between race and American democracy. Given the rich complexity that Mueller accomplishes, this reader was left wanting to hear more about how Benton’s career might help us rethink these classic debates. Yet Mueller can only be faulted so much for these decisions. All books are selective in what they include. In selecting this topic, Mueller has struck gold. It is unquestionable that between the 1820s and 1850s the Senate was a crucible of American politics. The most contentious issues of the Second Party System, from Indian Removal to slavery’s expansion, took on their most heated partisan dimensions in the upper chamber. It is a curious fact, then, that so little is written on important figures like Benton. This biography fills a gap in knowledge. Mueller is to be commended for the skill with which he recreated Benton’s career. It will excite historians of Missouri and anybody seeking a deeper understanding of this formative period in American politics. Scott Heerman University of Miami","PeriodicalId":338407,"journal":{"name":"Ohio Valley History","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"One Nation Divided by Slavery: Remembering the American Revolution while Marching toward the Civil War by Michael F. Conlin (review)\",\"authors\":\"E. K. Cheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jahist/jaw398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"WINTER 2016 79 of the Panama Congress in 1826, Mueller asserts that Benton’s speech was a “critical turning point in the creation of master race democracy” (128). It seems like an odd moment to highlight as a watershed, and without more evidence the claim is not fully supported. Yet these sorts of minor quibbles are inevitable with any work and they do not undermine Mueller’s larger argument about nationalism and white supremacy. In light of Mueller’s decision to make master race democracy an organizing principle of the book, it is curious that the book does not engage a wider scholarship. There is only a glancing discussion of major works on race and democracy, and even those discussions tend to look at older works, such as Reginald Horseman’s Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial AngloSaxonism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986) For decades, scholars from George Fredrickson to James Oakes and Edward Baptist have debated the relationship between race and American democracy. Given the rich complexity that Mueller accomplishes, this reader was left wanting to hear more about how Benton’s career might help us rethink these classic debates. Yet Mueller can only be faulted so much for these decisions. All books are selective in what they include. In selecting this topic, Mueller has struck gold. It is unquestionable that between the 1820s and 1850s the Senate was a crucible of American politics. The most contentious issues of the Second Party System, from Indian Removal to slavery’s expansion, took on their most heated partisan dimensions in the upper chamber. It is a curious fact, then, that so little is written on important figures like Benton. This biography fills a gap in knowledge. Mueller is to be commended for the skill with which he recreated Benton’s career. It will excite historians of Missouri and anybody seeking a deeper understanding of this formative period in American politics. Scott Heerman University of Miami\",\"PeriodicalId\":338407,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ohio Valley History\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ohio Valley History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jaw398\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ohio Valley History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jahist/jaw398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1826年巴拿马国会的第79页,穆勒断言本顿的演讲是“创造优等种族民主的关键转折点”(128)。这似乎是一个奇怪的时刻,强调作为一个分水岭,没有更多的证据,这种说法是不完全支持的。然而,这类小的吹毛求疵在任何工作中都是不可避免的,它们不会削弱穆勒关于民族主义和白人至上的更大论点。考虑到米勒决定将优等民族民主作为本书的组织原则,令人好奇的是,这本书没有涉及更广泛的学术研究。关于种族和民主的主要著作只有一个肤浅的讨论,甚至那些讨论也倾向于看一些更老的作品,比如雷金纳德·霍斯曼的《种族和天定命运:美国种族盎格鲁-撒克逊主义的起源》(剑桥,马萨诸塞州:哈佛大学出版社,1986年)几十年来,从乔治·弗雷德里克森到詹姆斯·奥克斯和爱德华·浸会特的学者们一直在争论种族和美国民主之间的关系。考虑到穆勒所完成的丰富的复杂性,这位读者想要更多地了解本顿的职业生涯如何帮助我们重新思考这些经典的辩论。然而,穆勒的这些决定只能受到这么多的指责。所有的书都是有选择性的。在选择这个话题时,穆勒找到了金子。毫无疑问,在19世纪20年代到50年代之间,参议院是美国政治的熔炉。第二党制度中最具争议的问题,从印第安人迁移到奴隶制的扩张,在参议院中呈现出最激烈的党派层面。那么,关于像本顿这样的重要人物的记载却很少,这是一个奇怪的事实。这本传记填补了知识上的空白。穆勒再现了本顿的职业生涯,他的技巧值得称赞。它将激发密苏里州的历史学家和任何寻求更深入了解美国政治形成时期的人。斯科特·希尔曼迈阿密大学
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
One Nation Divided by Slavery: Remembering the American Revolution while Marching toward the Civil War by Michael F. Conlin (review)
WINTER 2016 79 of the Panama Congress in 1826, Mueller asserts that Benton’s speech was a “critical turning point in the creation of master race democracy” (128). It seems like an odd moment to highlight as a watershed, and without more evidence the claim is not fully supported. Yet these sorts of minor quibbles are inevitable with any work and they do not undermine Mueller’s larger argument about nationalism and white supremacy. In light of Mueller’s decision to make master race democracy an organizing principle of the book, it is curious that the book does not engage a wider scholarship. There is only a glancing discussion of major works on race and democracy, and even those discussions tend to look at older works, such as Reginald Horseman’s Race and Manifest Destiny: The Origins of American Racial AngloSaxonism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986) For decades, scholars from George Fredrickson to James Oakes and Edward Baptist have debated the relationship between race and American democracy. Given the rich complexity that Mueller accomplishes, this reader was left wanting to hear more about how Benton’s career might help us rethink these classic debates. Yet Mueller can only be faulted so much for these decisions. All books are selective in what they include. In selecting this topic, Mueller has struck gold. It is unquestionable that between the 1820s and 1850s the Senate was a crucible of American politics. The most contentious issues of the Second Party System, from Indian Removal to slavery’s expansion, took on their most heated partisan dimensions in the upper chamber. It is a curious fact, then, that so little is written on important figures like Benton. This biography fills a gap in knowledge. Mueller is to be commended for the skill with which he recreated Benton’s career. It will excite historians of Missouri and anybody seeking a deeper understanding of this formative period in American politics. Scott Heerman University of Miami
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信