Scan barcode
tsharris's review against another edition
5.0
Amazing, brilliant, unforgettable - just a phenomenal account of the ideas that animated the American Revolution and how the patrician republicanism of the early founding gave way to the more uproarious democratic spirit of the early 19th century.
officerdean's review against another edition
5.0
What a read! I have read a lot of American Revolutionary War history but no e of them dug as deep as Mr. Wood. He tells us what the founding fathers and ordinary Americans were thinking and feeling as they all struggled to understand and determine what America was and was going to be. Simply fascinating. I feel I can identify and relate to early Americans much more after reading and their struggles were not too far removed from our struggles today.
bagelman's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
medium-paced
4.25
The argument here is that the American Revolution was the a major step away from the long declining idea of nobility.
icgerrard's review against another edition
5.0
I can't say enough good things about this book. Not only is the writing itself engaging, and the organization excellent, but Wood is master of the complex. You won't find yourself choosing your side in a neatly laid out dichotomy here - America is not truly a country of classical virtue in the tradition of the great Roman statesmen OR truly a country where truth has been democratized and the common man elevated to destroy all class distinction. It is both and neither. Wood masterfully shows how the ideals of the founders were the real and powerful manifestation of all the great promises of the enlightenment, and how these enlightenment ideals could not but lay the seeds for their own undoing. America is the fulfillment of old promises by being the destruction of the social order that gave us such promises. You'll have to search within yourself to decide how you feel about that, and whether it was a good thing. Regardless, this book is a masterful exercise in what it means to put something in context.
mightync's review against another edition
5.0
Exceptional. Very deserving of the Pulitzer Prize. Highly recommended.
drkshadow03's review against another edition
4.0
Gordon S. Wood contends that the gigantic social changes wrought by the American Revolution were much more radical than typically acknowledged and completely changed the social fabric of society. He argues that the American Revolution and its consequences were not as conservative as many modern people believe.
The British colonial society that existed in America prior to the Revolution was one modeled on monarchy and hierarchical relationships. In England, a certain class of hereditary aristocrats with large property, wealth, leisure, and education were considered the only true legitimate political rulers and held the bulk of political power. Each person had their place in a hierarchy of superiors and inferiors and a system of patronage and patrons. Social rank and distinctions were a fundamental part of this society, as well as kinships attachments between members of a society in which who you were related to could have major consequences for your prospects, and within families patriarchal father’s ruled their homes on similar hierarchical and patron/patronage grounds. Everyone from college students to magistrates to the military to farmers to artisans acknowledged social distinctions even within their own respective social spheres.
Although the British Americans colonies participated in this system, many of its features never took complete root in America. America never had a hereditary aristocracy. The local gentry that did manage to develop in the American colonies never could entirely live off their land without running into debt or being forced to engage in some mercantile pursuits on the side. While wealthy, their wealth never came anywhere near the greatest landowners in England. Likewise, the authority of traditional religion that was a part of this hierarchical system in England through the official Anglican Church never took strong root in America as many different Christian traditions existed throughout the various colonies and many of these lacked Christian hierarchies and ranks that made up the Anglican Church, consisting only of mere priests who maintained their authority within their local church and among its congregants.
Challenging these old hierarchical systems was the republicanism of the Enlightenment. Republicanism was not an idea that Americans invented. Many advocates of republicanism and its ideals in Europe were members of English and French nobility who didn’t consider that their enthusiasm for these ideas might erode their own social status and power. Many advocates of republicanism in the 18th century didn’t view republicanism as a replacement for monarchy, but as a way of reforming monarchy and thought they could exist side by side. Its values drew from an 18th century interpretation of the classical world, holding up Cicero and Cato as intellectual models. It posited that man was a political being who gained his fulfillment from participating in the political decisions of his government. Republicans of the 18th century believed to protect liberty and make the best political decisions for everyone required people that would be disinterested and guided by virtue for the greater good of the nation and the people. They believed land ownership was crucial in allowing people to be disinterested and not reliant on the caprice of the mob, or financial self-interests. As part of this line of thinking, common people such as merchants and farmer-tenants working on other peoples’ land for their living were not independent enough to be disinterested when making political decisions.
The Founding fathers adopted these 18th century Republican ideas during the revolution, but took them further. They envisioned a society based on meritocracy rather than on rank and birth; a society where one’s intelligence, education, and virtue mattered most. Social mobility would be based on individual character and ability. It would be a system that promoted equality of opportunity rather than if you were born into the right family or related to the right person. Many of the founding fathers came from humble backgrounds and were the first in their family to achieve the status of a gentleman and study the liberal arts at a college. Nevertheless, their vision still accepted it would be gentleman of leisure, property, and who possessed a liberal arts education from a college that would serve as the leaders of the new republic. The primary difference from older republican ideas was that it was more flexible who could join those ranks, believing these characteristics were something that could be achieved and learned, and not just something you had to be born into. They thought their republic would lead to an enlightened society based on virtue, progress, and the removal of superstition from the public sphere.
The revolution was more than just a change of government from monarchy to a democratic republic. Ultimately as Wood argues the entire society’s relationships and how they conceived those relationships with each other changed. Wood shows that democratization that replaced the hierarchical system didn’t end with the revolution and the idealized republican ideas of the founding fathers. Democracy was a new social order with new kinds of linkages holding people together, and it really did unleash some radically different perspectives than what had previously existed. Democracy granted new importance, dignity, and honor to ordinary people, not just a social elite, recasting the purpose of society as the pursuit of happiness by ordinary people. Wood suggests that prior to the American Revolution people didn’t think this way about ordinary person or the goal of society. In their later writings, many of the founding fathers revealed a pessimism and unhappiness with how society was unfolding. It ended up being far different than the educated and virtuous elite that they had imagined would lead the nation.
The radical character of the democracy witnessed changes in thinking about the political class and what type of people were fit to occupy such roles. Artisans and middling classes formed groups to advocate for their participation in politics. Participating in politics went from being a civic duty and the virtuous higher calling of an educated elite to a fully paid occupation that were careers like any other job. As ideas of equality spread among working and the middle class, people began to challenge the assumptions that many held in the 18th century. Leisure that was once so valued among the elite classes became redefined as idleness, and working for a living became a virtue in America. Expansion westward and opportunities for movement deteriorated hierarchical superior and inferior relationships between people further. Family became about affection between its members instead of patriarchal rule. Religion took an evangelical stamp and became more individualized and less formal with people switching between religions frequently too fulfill their personal spiritual needs. People were free to follow their natural desires with the removal of artificial restraints of government and traditional social ties, which often included blatantly following one’s self-interests in business and politics. This also became true of politicians who would serve the interests of their constituents and sometimes their own pecuniary self-interests. Another consequence of the Revolution and the participation of lower classes was the democratization of knowledge leading to anti-intellectualism and the feeling that one’s own opinion and thoughts were as good as any educated person’s. Indeed, public opinion came to matter more than in any other country at the time. Although the revolution failed to liberate women and black slaves, Wood argues that it allowed the possibility of anti-slavery movements and women’s rights movements. All egalitarian thinking stemmed from this social change at the heart of the American Revolution. It’s radical nature was the equality and egalitarian principles at its core that eventually leveled the field between people from different social spheres of life.
The British colonial society that existed in America prior to the Revolution was one modeled on monarchy and hierarchical relationships. In England, a certain class of hereditary aristocrats with large property, wealth, leisure, and education were considered the only true legitimate political rulers and held the bulk of political power. Each person had their place in a hierarchy of superiors and inferiors and a system of patronage and patrons. Social rank and distinctions were a fundamental part of this society, as well as kinships attachments between members of a society in which who you were related to could have major consequences for your prospects, and within families patriarchal father’s ruled their homes on similar hierarchical and patron/patronage grounds. Everyone from college students to magistrates to the military to farmers to artisans acknowledged social distinctions even within their own respective social spheres.
Although the British Americans colonies participated in this system, many of its features never took complete root in America. America never had a hereditary aristocracy. The local gentry that did manage to develop in the American colonies never could entirely live off their land without running into debt or being forced to engage in some mercantile pursuits on the side. While wealthy, their wealth never came anywhere near the greatest landowners in England. Likewise, the authority of traditional religion that was a part of this hierarchical system in England through the official Anglican Church never took strong root in America as many different Christian traditions existed throughout the various colonies and many of these lacked Christian hierarchies and ranks that made up the Anglican Church, consisting only of mere priests who maintained their authority within their local church and among its congregants.
Challenging these old hierarchical systems was the republicanism of the Enlightenment. Republicanism was not an idea that Americans invented. Many advocates of republicanism and its ideals in Europe were members of English and French nobility who didn’t consider that their enthusiasm for these ideas might erode their own social status and power. Many advocates of republicanism in the 18th century didn’t view republicanism as a replacement for monarchy, but as a way of reforming monarchy and thought they could exist side by side. Its values drew from an 18th century interpretation of the classical world, holding up Cicero and Cato as intellectual models. It posited that man was a political being who gained his fulfillment from participating in the political decisions of his government. Republicans of the 18th century believed to protect liberty and make the best political decisions for everyone required people that would be disinterested and guided by virtue for the greater good of the nation and the people. They believed land ownership was crucial in allowing people to be disinterested and not reliant on the caprice of the mob, or financial self-interests. As part of this line of thinking, common people such as merchants and farmer-tenants working on other peoples’ land for their living were not independent enough to be disinterested when making political decisions.
The Founding fathers adopted these 18th century Republican ideas during the revolution, but took them further. They envisioned a society based on meritocracy rather than on rank and birth; a society where one’s intelligence, education, and virtue mattered most. Social mobility would be based on individual character and ability. It would be a system that promoted equality of opportunity rather than if you were born into the right family or related to the right person. Many of the founding fathers came from humble backgrounds and were the first in their family to achieve the status of a gentleman and study the liberal arts at a college. Nevertheless, their vision still accepted it would be gentleman of leisure, property, and who possessed a liberal arts education from a college that would serve as the leaders of the new republic. The primary difference from older republican ideas was that it was more flexible who could join those ranks, believing these characteristics were something that could be achieved and learned, and not just something you had to be born into. They thought their republic would lead to an enlightened society based on virtue, progress, and the removal of superstition from the public sphere.
The revolution was more than just a change of government from monarchy to a democratic republic. Ultimately as Wood argues the entire society’s relationships and how they conceived those relationships with each other changed. Wood shows that democratization that replaced the hierarchical system didn’t end with the revolution and the idealized republican ideas of the founding fathers. Democracy was a new social order with new kinds of linkages holding people together, and it really did unleash some radically different perspectives than what had previously existed. Democracy granted new importance, dignity, and honor to ordinary people, not just a social elite, recasting the purpose of society as the pursuit of happiness by ordinary people. Wood suggests that prior to the American Revolution people didn’t think this way about ordinary person or the goal of society. In their later writings, many of the founding fathers revealed a pessimism and unhappiness with how society was unfolding. It ended up being far different than the educated and virtuous elite that they had imagined would lead the nation.
The radical character of the democracy witnessed changes in thinking about the political class and what type of people were fit to occupy such roles. Artisans and middling classes formed groups to advocate for their participation in politics. Participating in politics went from being a civic duty and the virtuous higher calling of an educated elite to a fully paid occupation that were careers like any other job. As ideas of equality spread among working and the middle class, people began to challenge the assumptions that many held in the 18th century. Leisure that was once so valued among the elite classes became redefined as idleness, and working for a living became a virtue in America. Expansion westward and opportunities for movement deteriorated hierarchical superior and inferior relationships between people further. Family became about affection between its members instead of patriarchal rule. Religion took an evangelical stamp and became more individualized and less formal with people switching between religions frequently too fulfill their personal spiritual needs. People were free to follow their natural desires with the removal of artificial restraints of government and traditional social ties, which often included blatantly following one’s self-interests in business and politics. This also became true of politicians who would serve the interests of their constituents and sometimes their own pecuniary self-interests. Another consequence of the Revolution and the participation of lower classes was the democratization of knowledge leading to anti-intellectualism and the feeling that one’s own opinion and thoughts were as good as any educated person’s. Indeed, public opinion came to matter more than in any other country at the time. Although the revolution failed to liberate women and black slaves, Wood argues that it allowed the possibility of anti-slavery movements and women’s rights movements. All egalitarian thinking stemmed from this social change at the heart of the American Revolution. It’s radical nature was the equality and egalitarian principles at its core that eventually leveled the field between people from different social spheres of life.