DOC The Age of Federalism by Stanley Elkins; Eric McKitrick in History

Review

9 of 9 people found the following review helpful. Deeply analytical view of the dawn of American politics. But not for the fainthearted.By Igor FaynshteynThis is not a typical popular history book. It is not merely a historical narrative; reciting major events; dates and historical figures in chronological order. Rather; it is a deep; penetrating; interpretive and scholarly political history of the first 12 years after the ratification of the US Constitution in 1788. I found it impossible to read this book without finding myself constantly thinking; re-reading passages and really focusing in on details. To say that this book is different from 99% of other popular history books on the store shelves is an understatement. To read this book is to immerse oneself in an intellectually satisfying experience. However; due to its enormous length (it's quite a tome); interpretive and analytical writing style; and its plethora of details; it is not for everyone. Certainly; it's not a summer reading material (though I read it for pleasure; beginning in the summer of 2013 and finished it in January; 2014). Although I am not a history buff (I took only one college history course); I thoroughly enjoyed this book and it's surely one of my fave non-fiction books of all time.The book is more or less chronologically organized; but at various points it tends to be organized by subject rather than by strict chronology. Each chapter feels like a scholarly summary of several Ph D dissertations about a given subject matter. The content tends to be interpretive; and analytical; and therefore very interesting and intellectually stimulating. But the writing style is not the most fluid one; and can feel loaded and heavy at times. But what the book may lack in narrative fluidity; it more than makes up for it in its penetrating and deeply scholarly analysis of the period.This magnificent work of scholarship examines the dawn of American politics after the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Specifically; it examines the beginning of the formation of political factions. Although these early political factions resembled in some ways the modern political parties; they nevertheless could not be called modern in any sense of the word. The political ideologies were in their infancy stages; professional party machinery was virtually absent; and there was still an intense anti-party animus ingrained in the American political culture. Nonetheless; the 12 years from 1788-1800 witnessed the gradual progression and maturation of political factions; which paved the way to more professional and sophisticated political parties in the coming decades.This is a magnum opus for the co-authors; both of whom were professors of American history. Ironically; while they made their names as graduate students and scholars in the field of slavery; this book has zero to say on the issue. In fact; while the book is deep and scholarly; its coverage range is rather narrow. It focuses almost exclusively on politics; both domestic and international. It has nothing about social history; culture; economics (except as it relates to politics); or slavery. Its focus remains steadfastly and exclusively on politics throughout the book.In examining the 12 years of political history; the authors provide very detailed and analytical narratives of major events and biographies of relevant political actors. The mini biographies rarely exceed several pages; and they are relevant to explaining the historical context. The authors also do an excellent job in constructing and meticulously explaining the vast political context; which includes explanations of structural and impersonal forces at work; such as economics; political culture; westward expansion; and etc.The book also contains surprisingly much about treaties and the French Revolution. However; the context for covering treaties; their detailed negotiations; and the French Revolution is still domestic politics. Since it is the authors' contention that treaties; and more generally foreign relations; played an active role in determining the split between the Federalists (who were anglophiles and Francophobes; led largely by Hamilton and Ames) and the Republicans (who were anglophones and Francophiles; led mainly by Jefferson and Madison); foreign relations get almost as much coverage as domestic politics.The book also does not contain many anecdotes; and has nothing about the Hamilton-Burr duel; or the tumultuous Jefferson-Adams election of 1800. However; there is extensive coverage of the Jay treaty and its accompanying negotiations; commercial and other treaties between US and France/Great Britain/Spain; XYZ affair; Whiskey Rebellion in PA; and some coverage of the Sedition and Naturalization Acts. Particularly; there is a broad and detailed coverage of the establishment of Hamilton's financial system and the rift it caused with Jefferson and Madison; which was the one event; more so than any other; that triggered the formation of political factions.As magnificent as this book is; however; it is not for the faint hearted. The paperpack edition contains 754 reading pages (excluding bibliography). The font is small; dense and single spaced. And given that the narrative is not the most fluid one; it will take quite an effort to get through it. It took me over half a year to finish it. By contrast; I usually finish 700-800 pg. books in about a month or less.The book is largely without a strong bias. If any bias may be detected it is the bias of realism. Both authors were graduate students of Richard Hofstadter; who was considered a liberal leaning academic at Columbia University. However; it seems that McKitrick and Elkins were not much influenced by his liberal views. In fact; they tend to be more conservative than either Hofstadter or his other famous disciples (i.e. Foner).In sum; this is a book well worth reading; but only for those interested in serious and contextual political history; and who are committed to a sustained and probably long effort. This is without a doubt one of my top 3 fave history books and I recommend it highly.6 of 6 people found the following review helpful. A Political History that Holds up well after Two DecadesBy gloine36This tome is a political history covering the years 1789-1801 which were the Federalist Era in the history of the United States. As a political history; the authors do an excellent job of placing the events that place in the context surrounding them. Their use of sources to support their work is well done. Stanley Elkins; Sydenham Clark Parsons Professor Emeritus of history at Smith College; and Eric McKitrick; Professor Emeritus at Columbia University earned the 1994 Bancroft Prize for this highly acclaimed work. Over the past two decades the book has aged well within the context of a political history. There are some drawbacks to the book when it is examined from the perspective of a 21st century historian. It is a pure political history and as such contains almost no references to gender; class; and race as many recent histories probably would. This in itself is not a bad thing though as the focus stays on the political aspects of the period covered and does not deviate down other avenues. Anyone doing research into this period will want to have this book as a resource. It is rather nice to have the twelve year period's political climate rolled into one book. The undertaking was ambitious and the two professors were very successful in their finished product. Unfortunately; this book is also written from the perspective of two academics who were writing for an academic crowd. Not only that crowd; but a narrower slice of historians within it which means this is not an easy flowing narrative. This does not detract from the scholarly value of the book in any way; but potential readers should be aware this is a scholarly read. The chapters are arranged chronologically and are broken down into smaller topical sections which definitely helps keep things organized as to who did what and when. Historians of the Early Republic already understand the need to do so as it is very easy to get bogged down in the minutiae of the period. The opening chapter of the book explains the purpose behind it as well as explaining the key differences which underlay the politics of the period. The country party versus court party is a simplistic; but highly accurate depiction of some of the forces involved. In addition; the authors press home how the leaders of the factions were divided by their feelings for Great Britain and France. The French Revolution and wars of the period drove much of the political strife as well and are explained in detail. All historians must understand that these points were major issues in the period and had tremendous impacts on the reasons for the actions many men took. I do wish the authors had gone a bit further into the mindsets of Thomas Jefferson; John Adams; and James Madison. These three men along with Alexander Hamilton were pivotal in the political strife that emerged early in George Washington's first term as president. They did an admirable job; however recent scholarship into the lives of these four men could be incorporated into a revised edition should that come to pass. The shifting politics of James Madison in particular could have used a greater focus as it is felt that his changing attitudes illustrate a great deal of how later generations would continually change their politics over time. This political evolution is what we now know to be a normal political process; but in the 1790s it was not supposed to be that way necessarily. I did detect a hint that the last year covered was abbreviated beyond the successful French mission. The abrupt change and fall from power of the Federalists from their successes in the elections of 1798 to their loss of power in 1800 was astounding and worthy of a book of its own. This just illustrates what a good job Elkins and McKitrick did in capturing the essence of the political strife of the Federalist Era in what could easily have been a few hundred pages longer. They do point out where future generations got some of their inspiration in the actions of this time such as the compact theory and secessionism from the Kentucky Resolutions. All in all; the book is still a great book which has held up well over time.3 of 3 people found the following review helpful. A master work about the early founders of the United states written by two internationally known historiansBy SaraThis is a book that the dedicated authors spent more then 20 years on the historical research. The late. Stanley Elkins was my dad and the late Eric Mckitrick was his co-author and best friend.Even though they worked in different states this book was their lifes work together. Puting out an authentic and historicaly accurate and interesting new work was their long term goal and they achieved that and won awards for this book. consider giving this book a try if you really want to know more about the important leaders that shaped the United States in its early years.