sbremer – Readings in 19th Century American History

Primary Source Annotated Bibliography – Expansionism and The Bear Flag Revolt

November 11, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

Bryant, Edward. What I Saw in California. 1848. Reprint, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1985.

Edward Bryant’s book is a detailed look at what an American immigrant to Alta California faced in their primary years in the country. Bryant’s book skyrocketed to fame following the California Gold Rush, and it is invaluable in that it shows the opinions of the westward movement of an ordinary citizens, as well as the motivations of an ordinary Kentucky newspaper man for travelling out west and who ultimately met up with Colonel Frémont and fought under his command.

Duvall, Marius. A Navy Surgeon in California 1846-1847: The Journal of Marius Duvall. Edited by Blackburn Rogers. San Francisco: John Howell, 1957.

Duvall’s daily journal entries that last from April of 1846 to May of 1847 gives us an “outside” American military perspective regarding the Bear Flag Revolt and its major players in that Duvall was stationed on the Portsmouth, a ship off the coast of California when the revolt broke out. Duvall’s account is most likely the earliest account to give adverse criticism to the Bear Flaggers, and it also gives detailed accounts of Frémont and his character as well.

Frémont, John C. The Expeditions of John Charles Frémont. Vol. 2, The Bear Flag Revolt and the Court-Martial. Edited by Mary Lee Spence and Donald Jackson. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1973.

John C. Frémont is one, if not the the most, important player in the event that was the Bear Flag Revolt. No history of the revolt is possible without discussing Frémont, and by looking at his journals, particularly the ones dealing with the year 1846 since they are many, one can attempt to seek out passages that give a clue as to whether Frémont was acting alone, acting in accordance with government wishes, and to what extent expansionist policies played a role.

Ide, Simeon. A Biographical Sketch of the Life of William B Ide. 1880. Reprint, Glorieta, NM: The Rio Grande Press, 1967.

Although Ide’s work is technically a biography, it is a biography of the first (and only) President of California, the prominent Bear Flagger, and the brother of the author of this volume. Simeon Ide declares that much of the information presented in his work is taken from knowledge he procured from his brother, so in some ways it is the detailing of William B. Ide’s own history of the Bear Flag Revolt, carrying with it no small amount of challenges in using it as a primary source.

Larkin, Thomas Oliver. The Larkin Papers: Personal, Business, and Official Correspondence of Thomas Oliver Larkin, Merchant and United States Consul in California. Vol IV, 1845-1846. Edited by George P. Hammond. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1953.

Thomas O. Larkin served as the only United States Consul to Alta California, and in that position he had constant communication to several high-ranking officials in both the American and Mexican governments. This volume’s preservation of his letters show the increasing alarm that Larking began to feel as he saw an increasing American presence in Alta California, and his correspondence with American officials, especially Secretary of State James Buchanan, reveal the American government’s official response as well as Larkin’s heightened suspicion.

Larkin, Thomas Oliver. The Larkin Papers: Personal, Business, and Official Correspondence of Thomas Oliver Larkin, Merchant and United States Consul in California. Vol. V, 1846. Edited by George P. Hammond. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1955.

This volume of Larkin’s correspondences covers only the year 1846 since there are a considerable amount more of them due largely to the outbreak of the Bear Flag Revolt and soon thereafter open warfare with Mexico. Larkin’s letters of this period illustrate that the revolt was an unexpected event that threw California into chaos, and they also illustrate that the Bear Flaggers and their rebellion clearly upset a plan for peaceful annexation that Larkin was working towards.

The Chinatown War Post

November 8, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

Scott Zesch’s book tells the largely forgotten history of what occurred in Los Angeles on October 21, 1871 in which eighteen Chinese men were killed by an angry mob comprised of non-Asians. The incident was in retaliation for the shooting of one Robert Thompson by Chinese thugs. Zesch gives a detailed, hour-by-hour breakdown of what occurred that night. Fifteen men were hanged and another three were fatally shot, and mostly all of them were innocent Chinese who were unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Zesch uses the Chinatown Massacre of 1871 as the backdrop for a larger discussion regarding the early history of the Chinese in Southern California. Zesch discusses the first Chinese immigrants to Los Angeles, and how they made their lives and settled into the rough, difficult society of the city. Of certain importance to Zesch’s book is his discussion of the Chinese “tongs” and huiguans, which were groups or organizations of Chinese, some legitimate and legal and some being criminal in nature. Zesch also details the issue of Chinese prostitution and marriage practices, both of which were central to the outbreak of violence.

As beirne points out (in his nicely titled post), Zesch’s book is titled The Chinatown War, because it details a much longer time period than just that fateful night. He breaks his book into two parts, with the first part detailing the establishment of a Chinese population in Los Angeles around 1850 and continues up to the night of the massacre. The second part details the massacre itself and the ramifications that ensued. Zesch argues that the general lawlessness and violence of wild west era Los Angeles that the Chinese moved into shaped and influenced how the Chinese developed and reacted to their new surroundings. Prior to the massacre, in fact, much of the violence presented is between the Chinese themselves. This is not to say that the Chinese were not persecuted and faced racism on a daily basis, they most certainly did. However, the very act that kicked off the events resulting in the massacre was the killing of one Chinese man at the hands of another Chinese man from a rival organization (P. 121).

I found vannoyj’s comments of Zesch’s book quite interesting. As others have noted, Zesch is an independent scholar, and it seems to me that he clearly wrote this book with a general audience in mind. However, I did not find his sentence structure confusing. In fact, I found it quite streamlined and I believe it to be the easiest to read of the books we have covered thus far. However, I found vannoyj’s assessment of Zesch’s discussion of women in his book to ring quite true, for the most part. For the Chinese women in the sex trade in Los Angeles at this time, I think the argument that they are given no voice or agency a compelling one. There are only a few instances where Chinese women are given a voice and a surprising degree of agency. This is mainly realized in Chinese women’s (and Chinese men for that matter) to pursue legal options. This is illustrated in the event in which the widow of one of the men killed in the massacre had the sad distinction of being the first Chinese women to lodge a criminal complaint in Los Angeles in which she accused another Chinese man of inciting a mob resulting in her husband’s death (P. 163).

The World the Civil War Made Post

November 1, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

The World the Civil War Made is a collection of essays that seeks to rethink the reconstruction paradigm as a means of best understanding the massive changes that the United States underwent after the Civil War. The essays cover a broad array of different peoples, regions, and ideas that the editors hope will suggest new framing questions and new modes of analysis (P. 2). Of central importance to the new types of thinking this book puts forth is the concept of the United States federal government as being composed of “stockade states.” This refers to the idea that the US government was not a broad, overreaching, powerful “Yankee leviathan,” but rather was a collection of military and civilian outposts that were powerful within narrow geographical boundaries, but were limited in their reach. These outposts were sometimes capable of enforcing their will, were sometimes overpowered, and were almost always beset by competing individuals and power centers who desired to live outside of the reach of authority (P. 6). A prime example of the use of the “stockade state” within the broader context of the book can be found in the third chapter, detailing the trials of the Ho-Chunk Indians of the Great Lakes area. Upon their removal from their homeland, they are forced into boxcars and carted off to Nebraska. Here, from the perspective of the Ho-Chunk, the state takes the form of a boxcar. The boxcar is the symbol of the United States’ federal power, and to the Ho-Chunk who faced the perils of forced migration that federal power was very much real (P. 96).

A further emphasis that this collection of articles puts forth is the idea of the illiberality of post-Civil War America. This is put forth in the essays that detail the championing of debt peonage in New Mexico and Chinese labor in California, the essay detailing the continued persistence of pro-slavery Christianity despite the death of slavery, the essay detailing the horrible practice of night riding, in which African Americans were kidnapped and whipped by roving bands of white men, or in the essay that raises the question of whether emancipation allowed free blacks to attend the theater. The final essay of the book also serves to place post-Civil War America onto the international stage as well. Zimmerman’s essay, as yaremenkolena points out, does this through the lens of Marx’s view towards the Civil War. It also places the American Civil War among the European Revolutions of 1848-1849, the October Revolution of 1917, and even the Popular Front of 1934-1939 (P. 306).

This collection of essays is also all about transformation, and how the United States transformed, both in terms of government and society, as a result of the Civil War. As queenlove35 points out, a central argument to Faust’s This Republic of Suffering is that the United States government had to transform itself in order to deal and cope with the massive loss of life as a result of the Civil War. Downs and Masur’s book also deals with this idea, though in a different fashion. Here, the government is still in the transitioning phase, and still learning from its experience of tearing itself asunder. One chapter in which this is illustrated is in the essay entitled “The Burnt District.” In what I thought to be one of the more powerful essays of the book, K. Stephen Prince is able to successfully show how Northerners viewed the ruined cities of the south. Prince illustrates how the North viewed these ruined cities as their opportunity to rebuild the south in its image and how northerners made sense of these ruins. The essay also hints towards Faust’s book in that it details something that is dark and slightly depressing, though it is done in a very thoughtful and non-conventional means.

Final Paper Polished Paragraph

October 27, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

The Bear Flag Revolt occurred on June 14, 1846 when a small band of Americans in Sonoma, California raised a rudimentary flag marked by a lone bear above the Mexican stockade there. This ushered in the brief existence of the Bear Flag Republic, the independent California that ceased to exist less than a month later when on July 9, 1846 the United States military raised the American flag over northern California. The Bear Flag Revolt has resulted in numerous controversies, many of which have naturally been picked up by scholars. One such controversy that has proven central in many scholarly works is the role that United States expansionism played in the outbreak of the rebellion. The question of whether the Americans who declared their independence from Mexico and the Californios were directly motivated by American expansion comes to the forefront. An extension of this question is that of whether the United States government had an active role in promulgating the rebellion. Scholars of this notion point to the clear fact that President James K. Polk was an avid expansionist, who partially gained office by stating that he would bring California into the Union. This argument is furthered by the mysterious journey of one Lieutenant Archibald Gillespie, who was known to have met with Polk, and then traveled to California where he met with the United States consul in Alta California, Thomas O. Larkin, and the commander of the Pacific Fleet John D. Slope. Upon delivering his messages he went north and met Colonel John C. Frémont, who turned south, rode into California, and then the Bear Flag Revolt conveniently took place. Many scholars point to this rather suspicious series of events as proof that President Polk sent secret orders to Larkin, Slope, and Frémont to take California by dubious means, thereby adding a crown jewel of American expansion to the empire. However, as one may imagine, this is not the only viewpoint shared by scholars.

Other scholars point to the fact that the content of Gillespie’s letters was never recorded. Gillespie most likely memorized the letters and then destroyed them to avoid an intelligence leak. The point is made that if the actual content of the letters was, and never can be known, a true declaration of Federal involvement cannot be made. Others argue that within Alta California, as Mexican California was then known, there was a growing degree of dissent by the Americans who had settled within it. To some, the Bear Flag Revolt was an event that American settlers turned to the American Revolution as inspiration for. They were an isolated band of Americans, who no longer wished to be under the thumb of Mexican rule. This viewpoint is bolstered by other bands of Americans throughout Alta California who called for looking to Texas as an inspiration to resist Mexican rule over their lives. Other bands suggested looking overseas, to Britain or France, for support against Mexico. Scholars of this view argue that Frémont and his men only joined the Bear Flaggers later, when they had already made their claim for independence without any word or aid from the United States.

Of certain importance in answering this question of the role of American expansionism on the Bear Flag Revolt is understanding the “leader” of it, Colonel John C. Frémont. His aims, goals, and actions in California have also resulted in much scholarly debate, with some praising him and others condemning him. Regardless, he stands as an important figure in this quagmire, and must feature in any discussion regarding the Bear Flag Revolt. Frémont’s actual role in the revolt has been much debated, as has his legitimacy of reentering California after he and his small cadre of men had left to Oregon. For many years Frémont has been prominently featured in this expansionist question, with both sides using him to further their arguments. He is very much an enigma within the riddle that is the Bear Flag Revolt.

Faust – Death and the American Civil War

October 18, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

Drew Gilpin Faust’s brilliant book This Republic of Suffering details how the massive death toll of the Civil War changed American society. Faust’s book tackles a seemingly obvious fact – that many people died in a war. However, Faust is able to successfully show that in many ways death in the American Civil War occurred in many unprecedented ways. First was the massive scale of loss, with 600,000 soldiers being killed, or equivalent to six million of today’s population (P. xi). Second was the rapidness, unpredictability, and efficiency that soldiers killed. Faust illustrates how new technological advances, such as rifled barrels and greater artillery, led to greatly increased ranges and effectiveness for killing (P. 39). Faust also illustrates how it was not just soldiers who lost their lives, but also an estimated 50,000 civilians were killed between 1861 and 1865. As a result of such a massive loss of life, society had to come up with new means of coping with death, and soldiers doing the fighting had to develop means to come to terms with the carnage occurring all around them.

As morganstocks points out, Faust is able to effectively produce an emotional book while maintaining her objectivity. This Republic of Suffering is a deeply moving work. This much is very clear from just the beginning pages of the book. However, as Morgan points out, she also looks to factual number data from the government as a means of study as well. Faust also portrays the effects death had on people from nearly every angle. Understandably her focus is on the troops involved, but she gives the Union and the Confederacy an equal treatment. She also includes an (albeit brief) discussion regarding African-American soldiers and how they coped with dying and killing and how they were in some ways uniquely affected by death. However, an interesting thought was raised by Robert, in that the focus is much heavier on the eastern campaigns than the western ones.

As many have already pointed out, Faust’s sources are fantastic. Her book is heavily primary-source based, and she uses them brilliantly. Her selection of soldiers’ letters perfectly describe the horrors of war, and are positively heart wrenching at times. I was also impressed with Faust’s selections for her chapter titles. They are simple, one-word titles but they perfectly encapsulate the theme of her chapter. I found this to be particularly true in the “Naming” and “Realizing” chapters. Faust is able to show how the deaths of the Civil War were instrumental in bringing out modernity as well. Whether it be in the creation of dedicated cemeteries for fallen soldiers such as that at Gettysburg, in improved bureaucracies for documenting fallen soldiers, or in refrigerated coffins or embalming methods this argument is repeatedly proven to be true.

In reading Faust’s book I cannot help but think of Jay Winter’s book Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning, which details the massive deaths of World War I and how those of the cultures involved dealt with it. Winter argues that society turned to preexisting, more traditional methods of coping, many of which can be found in This Republic of Suffering. Faust also mentions Winter, but only in passing (P. 30). Winter’s book, though published first, can be read as something of a continuation of Faust’s book. In sum, Faust’s book is a profound, deeply moving, very well researched, and thought-provoking work. I cannot speak more highly of Republic, and I think one would be hard pressed to find someone who did not feel the same.

Supplementary Reading Post – Truett

October 3, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

In her 2014 article, “Historical Archaeologies of the American West,” Kelly J. Dixon establishes a well-written and thoroughly researched historiography detailing various means of archaeology and how they pertain to the American west. She argues that the rich research underscores the American west’s dynamic cultural heritage, and that this research can fit into a four-part conceptual framework consisting of themes. These four themes are colonialism and postcolonialism, landscape transformation, migration and diaspora, and industrial capitalism (Dixon, 177). Dixon then proceeds to divide her article into four parts, with each part focusing on one of her themes along with relevant works that support her assertion. Dixon acknowledges the breadth of the topic she is tackling, but nonetheless is successful in providing key information regarding the scholarship concerning historical archaeologies throughout American west history. She states that scholarship can be divided into works by “old” Western historians, with Frederick Jackson Turner being the apogee of these historians, and “new” Western historians, which are made up of historians working after the cultural revolutions of the 1960’s and 1970’s. Dixon shows how much of early Western history was overtly influenced by myths, dime novels, and propaganda. She then brings to light the major works that combatted these views and brought a more scientific study to the history of the American west (Dixon, 178).

The first part of Dixon’s article deals with archaeologies that relate to colonialism and postcolonialism. The entirety of the article takes a bottom-up approach, with Dixon focusing heavily on indigenous populations and the effect that Western encroachment had on them. For instance, Dixon looks at the founding of the Spanish colony of New Mexico in 1598 as a prime example of her colonial and postcolonial theme. She states that after eighty years of living under Spanish control, the Pueblo people of the area launched a series of attacks on Spanish civil and religious institutions, an event now called the Pueblo Revolt. The Spanish responded with more troops, indigenous allies, and more colonists, but the Spanish recognized Pueblo land rights and allowed Pueblo religious rites (Dixon, 185). Dixon then continues to state that archaeological evidence, Pueblo oral traditions, and written records support the claim that the Pueblo were never actually conquered, and were successfully able to resist Spanish encroachment. In using the Pueblo Revolt as an example of her “colonialism and postcolonialism theme,” Dixon is able to place a number of traditional historical archaeologies within her larger conceptual framework. The archeologies of battlefields, forts, missions, mortuary behavior, and memory fit neatly into both the revolt and in terms of attempted Spanish colonialism.

Dixon’s two sections, “Landscape Transformation” and “Industrial Capitalism” have the most in common with Samuel Truett’s book Fugitive Landscapes. Dixon defines landscape transformation as “ecological and biological transformation that accompanied colonization” (Dixon, 188). She states that although indigenous people suffered in many ways as a result of a shared experience between native peoples and colonizing powers, some American Indian groups experienced an ethnogenesis. This was due in large part to the adoption of European livestock, such as cattle and horses. Europeans, however, largely struggled due in large part to their ignorance in managing and living in new terrains in the west (Dixon, 190). This sentiment is echoed in Truett’s book when he states that Spanish authorities found Mexico in ruins due to their ancestors’ inability to cope with living in such an area (Truett, 28). Truett also discusses the changing of landscapes, particularly in his discussion of the changing of the frontier into an industrialized frontier. This is illustrated in Phelps Dodge’s implementation of the railroad, which physically changed the landscape of the Arizona borderlands, but also resulted in the changing of the cultures of those involved in the area, as well as creating an anchor for a new vast industrial landscape (Truett, 83). These aspects of Truett’s book fit perfectly within Dixon’s “landscape transformation” theme of historical archaeologies, and Truett could very well be implemented as an example in Dixon’s historiography.

Dixon’s final portion of her article details the implementation of industrialization and capitalism in the American west. Dixon begins this portion by discussing the fur trade in the 18th century as an early form of industrialized capitalism in the west, and finishes the portion with a discussion of mining ventures as being the culmination of capitalism in the region. Although Truett focuses intently on mining ventures in the southwest United States and northern Mexico, Dixon opts to focus on mining ventures in Alaska and the Colorado region. However, there is a great deal of similarity in their two pieces. Dixon states that the mining ventures were carried out by capitalist “colonizers” throughout the western United States following the discovery of gold at Sutter’s Fort in California in 1848 (Dixon, 201). This in turn led to an influx of migrants to work the mines from all over the United States, ultimately resulting in the widespread displacement of native groups. Other groups, however, such as the northern Paiute Indians of Nevada created urban cosmopolitan ethnic groups when faced with displacement (Dixon, 202). This idea is central to Truett’s book. Truett details the modernization of the U.S.-Mexico borderlands through the interaction between the groups living and operating in those lands. Although the two scholars are discussing two separate areas of the American west, and have ultimately different goals for their works, they hit upon the similar themes that modernization in the American west came about as a means of industrialization, that it often resulted in displaced natives, and this often resulted in the blending of culture groups as a means of self-preservation.

A final reason for picking this article as my supplementary reading was because it is a fine piece of argumentative historiography. Considering this class requires us to submit an historiography of our own, Dixon’s piece can serve as a fine model or example. Of particular note, Dixon concludes the work with a statement on how the scholarship of the topic at hand can be furthered in future study. Dixon states that further work involving archaeologies of the American west should integrate the four themes put forth in her article. Dixon continues to say that these themes can be used to transcend the nature-culture divide among various peoples sharing a border or a history as a means to understand the modern world (Dixon, 207). In this sense, Dixon and Truett end on similar notes. Truett ends his book by stating that in the modern world, we tend to see borderlands as competing models of authority and power. However, the history of these areas go beyond such dichotomies, and by focusing on smaller aspects, such as his “fugitive landscapes,” we can learn what truly makes up the borderlands (Truett, 184).

Works Cited:

Dixon, Kelly J. “Archaeological Histories of the American West.” Journal of Archaeological Research 22, no. 3 (September, 2014): 177-252.

Truett, Samuel. Fugitive Landscapes: The Forgotten History of the U.S.-Mexico Borderlands. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006.

Final Paper Proposal

September 29, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

In my paper, “Conquerors of California,” I will be looking at the Bear Flag Revolt of 1846 and the men who had the most influence on the unfolding of the revolt itself and on the events that followed in its wake. These men are President James Knox Polk and Colonel John Charles Fremont who led the small band of Americans in the revolt at Sonoma. I intend to utilize a top-down approach in analyzing this event, focusing on both Polk and Fremont’s motives and methods. I intend to discover how historians’ perceptions of these two men has changed over time. I also want to track the historiographical treatment of the revolt itself, seeing how historians have come to interpret the event through the passage of time.

In focusing on this event, I seek to answer a few key questions. The Bear Flag Revolt is often marginalized and discussed in the wider context of the Mexican-American. It is often briefly discussed as the casus belli of the full-blown war between the two nations. However, the actual personalities, actions, and motives by those involved in the revolt are not so clear-cut. In looking into the various primary and secondary sources available, a convoluted and at times confusing picture comes into focus. The question that can then be asked is who actually conquered California? Was it really a small ragtag band of adventurous Americans acting alone? Or did the United States have a direct involvement in instigating the rebellion as a means of touching off the wider war with Mexico? This would serve as a means of fulfilling Polk’s great ambition to double the geographic size of the United States. Another question is what role did Archibald Gillespie, a young Marine officer, play in the revolt? Was he a major player or a puppet of the Polk administration? Another question that I would like to answer is what was the Mexican response and reactions to the revolt? Finally, we can ask what the Bear Flag Revolt can tell us about wider American desires to move westward, and how far the United States was willing to go in order to fulfill those desires.

Although oftentimes discussed as part of the Mexican-American War, a bevy of primary sources specifically regarding the Bear Flag Revolt are at the disposal of historians. The diary of President Polk is one such source, while multi-volume works of Fremont’s journals and diaries exist as well. Another intriguing source, though one that will require caution and care in using it, is a biography of William B. Ide, a leader of the Bear Flag Revolt and the only president of California, written by his brother Simeon Ide. The journal of one Marius Duvall, who was a young navy surgeon serving in California and interacted with the Bear Flaggers could also provide some perspective on the revolt. A further primary source is the multi-volume collection of the correspondences of Thomas Oliver Larkin, the first and only U.S. consul to Alta California. These letters are between Larkin and nearly every important figure involved in the revolt, including some addressed to Mexican leaders. In the end, I hope to shed a new light on an important event in my native state of California’s history.

Sim – A Union Forever Post

September 27, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

In his book A Union Forever, David Sim seeks to interject Irish nationalism into the larger issue of United States foreign policy in the nineteenth century. He argues that a young group of urban nationalists associated themselves with the United States, looking to America for a “model of nonsectarian self-governance that might be translated for Irish conditions” (P. 4). Sims continues this idea to argue that both Irish-American nationalists and American statesmen both sought to manipulate one another to further their own diplomatic goals. Sim states that Irish-American nationalists “sought to manipulate the foreign policy of the United States for their own ends” (P. 10). This all revolved around the issue of Anglo-American relations and Sim seeks to illustrate how this relationship destabilized relations between The United States and Great Britain. A key example of this can be found in Sim’s discussion regarding U.S. neutrality towards the Fenian raids into Canada under the Johnson administration. By tolerating Fenian “activities,” the United States was able to get Great Britain to mitigate the accusations brought forth for her actions over the Alabama fiasco and the construction of confederate ships in British ports. The Fenians, on the other hand, were able to link the threat of U.S. diplomatic and even possible military power to Irish ends (P. 94). I found this a striking example of how at this particular point in history, just post-American Civil War, these Irish-American nationalists and American statesmen, whether fully conscious of it or not, were playing off of one another’s needs and desires to fulfill what each side sought to achieve.

As David and Andrew have pointed out, Sim’s book has direct ties to Gould’s the Powers of the Earth. The Law of Nations is still having an impact on transnational and transatlantic foreign relations. However, it is the Irish who are seeking the recognition that the United States once sought. In looking at 20perez16’s summary of Gould, one could easily substitute “Ireland” or “the Irish” for the “United States” or “Americans.” In looking at this aspect of Sim’s argument, I found it to also mean that the United States at this time had firmly established itself at the forefront of transatlantic politics. The U.S. is able to match Britain at nearly every turn, and even has the struggling, hopeful Irish using the example of the United States as inspiration and a model to aspire to. This supports Gould’s assertion that the United States had not gained true independence until roughly the 1820’s.

I also found Chapter Four of Sim’s book the most compelling. This chapter focuses on the controversy generated around the validity of naturalized U.S. citizenship. I found it quite interesting that some of the most contentious moments between the United States and Britain occurred because of this issue. When Irish Americans were arrested upon returning to Ireland from America, they were viewed as threats, being “imbued with Yankee notions, thoroughly reckless, and possessed of considerable military experience” (P. 101). However, many of these men had American citizenship as well, and some, such as John Warren, wrote public letters from jail charging the United States as being unable to protect its citizens abroad while the British simultaneously ignored his American citizenship. This chapter was excellent at detailing how these Irish nationalists were able to almost engineer a very real rift between the United States and Britain from inside prison, and had it not been for the actions of militant Irish nationalists outside the prison walls they may have succeeded. This also leads to another point of interest I found with Sim’s work. He lets us know as early as page two that everything he is going to discuss in his book ultimately failed. He states, “No sovereign Irish nation emerged as a consequence of their efforts. In fact, Irish American agency had the paradoxical effect of breeding closer Anglo-American relations over the long term” (P. 2). This sentence resulted in me reading Sim’s book not just as a history of how Irish nationalists impacted American foreign policy, but also how this resulted in the cooling of tensions between the United States and Britain and a move to the amelioration of these relations.

Final Paper Topics

September 15, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

The Bear Flag Revolt of 1846. Using this event as a means to look into the influx of American settlers to the west?
An assessment of the presidency of James Knox Polk. Perhaps focusing on the lands he added to the United States?
I would really like to do something revolving around John C. Fremont. I find the man just fascinating. This could possibly tie into Topic 1.
The Philippine War: The birth of American imperialism?

Beckert/Rockman Post

September 13, 2016December 16, 2020sbremer

In this collection of articles, editors Sven Beckert and Seth Rockman put forth the argument that in contrast to more popular assertions, slavery came to hold a role of central importance in the development of not just American capitalism in the nineteenth century, but in the development of global capitalism. They argue that capitalism expanded from within the world market that it had created, and then came to play a central, decisive, role first in the Caribbean and Latin America, and then in North America where it had close ties to the Industrial Revolution and, as Robert points out, the Great Divergence (P. 3).

As dshanebeck, points out, a number of methodologies are used by the various authors of this book, giving a broad and multidimensional approach to the topic at the hand. The division of the book into four parts, with three or four articles being grouped around a further subdivision of the “slavery as a constitutive element of capitalism” (P. 5) argument allows for a number of scholars to provide succinct, specialized accounts of aspects of slavery that support Beckert and Rockman’s argument. For instance, the book includes chapters ranging from a discussion revolving around the creation of a mechanized piece of machinery, the McCormick reaper, in Rood’s chapter, to a detailed look into more than 10,000 loans from three southern states (P. 108) in Martin’s chapter in order to show slavery as being a system of finance. There are also biographical works, in Boodry and Shankman’s chapters, and as morgonstocks points out, in Majewski’s chapter an article focusing on education as a means of illustrating the impact slavery had on America’s developing economy. All of this had the effect, at least on a personal level, of making the book feel “fresh.” It never gets bogged down in dwelling on a certain subject, and the idea of encountering a new topic, scholar, and methodology created the desire to continue on and see how the next article would support the overarching thesis of the book itself.

One chapter that I found particularly interesting was Stephen Chambers’ piece “No Country but their counting-houses.” Right off the bat, the first sentence grabbed my attention. He states, “Cuban slavery impacted early American capitalism through Russia” (P. 195). Upon first glance, at least it certainly did to me, this sentence seems to be incredibly confusing. How any of these things were related to one another, let alone help build American capitalism, was beyond me. However, Chambers proceeds to unravel this mystery, illustrating how American capitalism was dependent on reliable reexport markets for Cuban sugar and coffee (P. 197). However, following the Napoleonic Wars, trade restrictions effectively barred American ships from continental Europe, so they looked to the Baltic for these reexport markets (P. 199). I found the entire story of John Quincy Adams’ trip to St. Petersburg, coupled with the accounts of the various other diplomats, agents, and merchants incredibly interesting and compelling. I also found that it greatly supported the globalized capitalism argument that is put forth.

In conclusion, I feel that this book continues with the trend of the other readings we have done so far of forcing the reader to think about an aspect of nineteenth century America, and to analyze it and see it in a new light. In Hämäläinen, it was the idea of empire and Native American agency. In Gould, it was the idea of what true independence was and where it came from. And now, in Beckert and Rockman’s book, we are forced to rethink slavery and investigate not just its political ramifications, but the ramifications it had on the development of an incredibly important global economic system.

Readings in 19th Century American History – Fall 2016

Author: sbremer