Athol (Massachusetts) Historical Society President Susannah Whipps-Lee said the time capsule — which has yet to be opened — was made from an old glass container that looked like a pickle jar with a rusted metal screw top. It was buried about 150 years ago, she explained, in what is known as the Old Indian Cemetery or Settlers Burial Ground, which has no gravestones.

The capsule has not been opened yet, but could contain some important and surely interesting documents. The capsule has perhaps as many as “300 documents” and was discovered by Athol history teacher Keith Williams who had read about the possibility of a buried time capsule in an Athol Town History book.

Starting next year, here in our School District in Colorado, U.S. History A and B will start post-Reconstruction with the Gilded Age. No more early American history. I made a proposal to keep this time period, up to 1877, as a “U.S. History Studies” class as they wanted to call it. Well it has been approved and I have a few weeks to write a description and propose a list of essentials! I look forward to this and to teaching the class next fall!

This is also a time period that is crucial in my personal quest for preserving American Exceptionalism. One of the things that is being confused centers on American Exceptionalism as promoting, for example, the Puritans as a “Citty on the Hill” community, Manifest Destiny as exceptional, “White Man’s Burgen” as honorable or whatever. As you can see this would be absurd. We teach that this was how THEY saw themselves and then perhaps the reasons why. We seek understanding and we do so without using presentism whereby we become social activitists. As I have stated numerous times (here and here), there is no way any one of us could not have been a racists had we lived in 1830s America. As an educator we can take an emphasis that focuses on understanding the past or we can use the past to promote social change (New Left Historians).

America was considered by many at the time to be a “utopia,” because it was. And indeed it was an experimental society and the leader in republicanism and self-government. It had the widest suffrage of any nation at the time and its commitment to the rule of law and equality for all white men made it the most democratic place on earth. This is undisputed. This is also exceptional.

As for American Exceptionalism that I am interested in here, the teaching of United States history from the perspective of an observer of history seeking understanding. Perhaps the best way to get a sense for America at this time is by reading what foreign observers documented. It would be easy to quote Marquis de Lafayette during his 1824-25 visit or of course Alexis de Tocqueville, who was more a cheerleader than an observer. However, there are better and more balanced observers.

German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel visited American in the early 1800s and declared that America was “the land of the future” and proclaimed that “in the time to come, the center of world historical importance will be revealed there.” Yet that is too easy.

I want to look at two European women who visited the United States in the early part of the 1800s. Harriet Martineau was a nearly deaf English woman of some fame,  contemporaries dubbed her as the “fist woman sociologist.” She spent 2 years in America and afterward wrote a book about her experiences titled, “Society in America” (1837). It was a massive 3 volume work. Was she impressed with America, yes? Was she also critical, most certainly.

Martineau noted early one observation that struck her as incredible, “Throughout the prodigious expanse of that country, I saw no poor men, except a few intemperate ones. I saw some very poor women; but God and man know that the time has not come for women to make their injuries even heard of. I saw no beggars but two professional ones, who are making their fortunes in the streets of Washington. I saw no table spread, in the lowest order of houses, that had not meat and bread on it Every factory child carries its umbrella; and pigdrivers wear spectacles.” ["Society in America" (1837). I, p. 12]

However, as she traveled more she saw the social ills that plagued America (and other nations) in the “political non-existence” of women. If this was the land of equality where was the equality of women? A progressive stance that the world was not, unfortunately, ready for including America.  Of course the likes of Abagail Adams were bemoaning this well before Martineau. But most importantly, she called America out for its hypocritical stance on liberty and equality and yet the existence of Slavery. She came to the just conclusion, “Americans have realized and things for which the rest of the world is still struggling … [yet] the civilization and morals of the Americans fall far below their own principles.” [Ibid, Vol. III, 179-205]

Americans enjoyed a lifestyle and standard of living that far exceed most European societies. As an instructor I can make sure to discuss how America was seen as an exceptional place, as well as discuss the different ways Americans saw themselves as exceptional. Within the dichotomy of what was or was not exceptional, we can teach a balanced and objective view of America.

 Part II: Francis Wright’s views on America as expressed in her 1825 book, “Plan for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery in the United States without Danger of Loss to the Citizens of the South.”

In the introduction of the book, Watson recalls a story by a young Frenchman who visited America in 1834 and witnessed, among many things, a Democratic Party Parade. The event amazed the visiting European. As a matter of fact, he had NEVER seen anything like it. In Europe and in France where he was from, the ordinary European was not allowed to vote and to have gathered in such demonstrations would most likely have been considered a seditious  act.

The amazed visitor wrote after the event, “[its] scenes belong to history. They are the episodes of a wondrous epic which will bequeath a lasting memory to posterity, that of the coming democracy.”

I know, a delusional Frenchman who did not understand how our Constitution did not give everyone the right to vote: most blacks and women prominent among them. There was nothing exceptional about us, this so called “coming democracy” was a farce.

Yep, nothing exceptional about it…

Levin says, “I am not studying history in order to feel better or worse about my country. Rather, and without going into detail, I am trying to understand the richness and complexity of what is the human experience. It has nothing at all to do with whether I love or hate America. To be completely honest, I am not sure what that even means. I will leave overly simplistic categories to overly simplistic minds.” [Link]

Levin makes the assumption that all of us “simplistic minds” are defending American Exceptionalism as if we are not capable or interested in the “richness and complexity” of history. Levin is an arrogant person and when you don’t agree with him, you are simple minded and not capable of understanding his level of thinking. Remember, he is sooo much smarter than the rest of us “simple minded” folk. LOL.

Because to even argue that America was unique, at least to intellectual morons, is tantamount to intellectual bankruptcy. To be a serious historian you must look for  “richness and complexity,” whatever that means!? Frankly, Levin and I will never agree on what that means and that is what is at the heart of the issue. He can call me whatever he wants, I will do the same. The gloves will stay off. It does indeed have NOTHING to do with love or hate, but something else and that something is what will divide the likes of Levin and myself.

However, I will offer a guess. (Note, this is my own personal opinion!) Levin has issues with the Republican Party going back to Reconstruction and what they failed to accomplish. He is also disappointed in what the American Revolution failed to accomplish. He is very much like Howard Zinn. But that is the problem, America was exceptional for what it was attempting. It initially failed to live up to our modern and presentists views. I wish our Founders were able to give equality to all, though nowhere else on such a scale was there anything close to early America in terms of political participation.

The post-Civil War era was a disaster for Civil Rights. It is disappointing. However, when one looks to history with such a “presentist” eye and can then call themselves a “Democrat” — which is the historic party of slavery — is to me a bit hypocritical.

I know, I’m simply not smart enough to understand and I look forward to LEVIN setting me straight.

Chris.

Looks and sounds like a very Christian Nation at least for a while after its founding…

The book is broken up into parts, first he starts with some pre-Colombian information and then moves into the first encounters with Europeans. He finishes with the establishment of America and its pre-Empire beginnings. The narrative is engaging and most importantly a lot of great material and well researched. I highly recommend it!

• James Madison was the only president to face enemy gunfire while in office.
  When the British invaded and burned Washington, D.C. in the War of 1812, Madison
  took command of a battery of artillery, exercising his authority as commander-in-chief.
• Even when the British attacking forces were nearing the White House, Dolly Madison refused to leave until she could take with her a portrait of George Washington.
• The Battle of the Brass: The battle of Bladensburg in August 1814 was the only battle in American history where the President, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of State were all present. The Americans lost.
• The British army in Canada lived largely on American beef smuggled openly across the borders of New York and Vermont.

Do you have any to add?

Gordon S. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution. New York: Vintage, 1991.

—-, The American Revolution: A History (Modern Library Chronicles). Modern Library Chronicles, 2002.

—-, Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different. Penguin Paperback, 2006.

Edmund S. Morgan,The Birth of the Republic, 1763-89 (The Chicago History of American Civilization). Third Edition. University of Chicago Press, 1992.

—-, American Slavery, American Freedom. New York: Norton, 1975.

David Northrup, The Atlantic Slave Trade (Problems in World History). Second Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002.

Joseph J. Ellis, American Creation: Triumphs and Tragedies in the Founding of the Republic. New York: Knopf, 2007.

John Ferling, Setting the World Ablaze: Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and the American Revolution. University of Oxford Press, 2000.

Carol Berkin, A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution. Harcourt,  2002.

Pauline Maier, American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence. New York: Knopf, 1997.

God, there are more but I will stop before I lose my train of thought! I have left out the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist papers, and tons more that I have on my reading shelf.  Anyway, I am trying to immerse myself in as much good scholarship that I can. I am sure there is plenty else I could be looking at, but there it is.

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about about the debates concerning the Founders and the Constitution. With the current mood of some parts of the nation and now with the new Supreme Court Justice nomination, I found myself contemplating where and who we should be taking our cues from? The Federalists or Anti-Federalists?  At one moment it seems clear that it is Jefferson and the Anti-Nationalists, but then in another moment it is Hamilton and Madison and the Nationalists (Federalists).

I found something that Gordon S. Wood wrote in his The Radicalism of the American Revolution, in which he argues that though the revolution was not as bloody and radical compared with say the French Revolution, it was still radical in the nature of the post-Revolution society it created.  I think he makes a strong argument that the aftermath of the revolution was radical in how it reordered American society, especially in removing paternalism and primogeniture, among other aspects. I am greatly simplifying it here.

But my point is that Wood of course discusses how Americans, generally, viewed government, and I quote:

“Few if any if the common people regarded government as a means by which economic and social power might be redistributed or the problems of their lives resolved.” (p. 87)

That took me back a bit. Though I know that Progressive historians will challenge this comment.

I think if we look at the writings of both Federalists and Anti-Federalists, we will see that both feared a large uncontrollable government; one more so than the other. After all, it is a fact that the Constitution was created first and foremost to limit government by establishing what it could and could not do.

More later…

C

Thomas Paine’s popularity today among historians and readers of early American history has numerous origins. It’s not hard to imagine why? He never owned slaves and immediately on his arrival (late 1774) denounced slavery and even joined Benjamin Franklin as a member of Franklin’s anti-slavery society. Paine also was an outspoken critic of the English Crown, parliament and its corruption, but most importantly for modern social historians, he was an advocate of the poor, the downtrodden. His ability to offer clarity, context, and relevance to the debate over separation from the mother country of England for the colonists was essential to the popularity of his famous pamphlet, “Common Sense.” His words would have inspired those Revolutionaries already decidedly for independence, and the simplicity and force of his argument would have swayed those who were “on the fence.” The Loyalists would have, most likely, stayed loyal regardless of Paine’s argument.

I am reading several books on Paine which I highlight here and highly recommend. I am also reading a few other books of note and I share those as well. Everything right now is pretty crazy with 2 graduate classes and a full load of classes I am teaching. The end is in sight however, with just a few more weeks of school to go!