No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 December 2008
This is the beginning of a journey that promises to be eventful for students of American political development. Samuel Kernell is on to some-thing. The speculative and substantive implications of his findings, especially if they can be expanded and replicated, seem to be very great indeed.
1. Turner, Frederick Jackson, The Significance of Sections in American History (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1932)Google Scholar; Craven, Avery O., The Coming of the Civil War, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1957)Google Scholar.
2. Wiebe, Robert H., The Search for Order, 1877–1920 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1967Google Scholar). See also Burns, James McGregor, The Vineyard of Liberty (New York: Random House, 1983)Google Scholar and The Workshop of Democracy (New York: Random House, 1985); Diggins, John P., The Lost Soul of American Politics: Virtue, Self-Interest and the Foundations of Liberalism (New York: Basic Books, 1984)Google Scholar; and , Wiebe, The Opening of American Society: From the Adoption of the Constitution to the Eve of Disunion (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984)Google Scholar.
3. Robinson, Donald, Slavery in the Structure of American Politics, 1765–1820 (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970)Google Scholar; Cooper, William J., The South and the Politics of Slavery, 1828–1856 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1978)Google Scholar. Holt, Cf. Michael F., The Political Crisis of the 1850s (New York: John Wiley, 1978)Google Scholar.
4. On democratic ideology see Holt, Political Crisis; and Silbey, Joel H., A Respectable Minority: The Democratic Parly in the Civil War Era, 1860–1868 (New York: W.W. Norton, 1977)Google Scholar.
5. See, for example, Lee Benson, Joel H. Silbey, and Phyllis Field, “Toward a Theory of Stability and Change in American Voting Patterns: New York State, 1792—1970,” in Silbey, Joel H., Bogue, Allan G., and Flanigan, William, The History of American Electoral Behavior (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978), 78–105Google Scholar; and McCormick, Richard L., “The Party Period and Public Policy: An Exploratory Hypothesis,” Journal of American History 66 (09 1979): 279–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6. For an early important challenge to conventional periodization of America's past see Cochran, Thomas P., “The Presidential Synthesis in American History,” American Historical Review 53 (07 1948): 748–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7. Compare Burnham, Walter Dean, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1970)Google Scholar, with Lichtman, Alan J., “Critical Election Theory and the Reality of American Presidential Politics, 1916—1940,” American Historical Review 81 (04 1976): 317–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Benson, Silbey, and Field, “Toward a Theory of Stability and Change.”
8. Gienapp, William, “‘Politics Seem to Enter into Everything’: Political Culture in the North, 1840–1860,” in Essays on American Antebellum Politics 1840–1860, ed. Maizlish, Stephen E. and Kushma, John J. (College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 1982), 15—69Google Scholar; Silbey, Joel H., The Partisan Imperative: The Dynamics of American Politics before the Civil War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.
9. Thornton, J. Mills, Politics and Power in a Slave Society: Alabama, 1800–1860 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1978)Google Scholar; Sellers, Charles G. Jr, James K. Polk: Jacksonian, 1795–1843 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957), 361Google Scholar; manuscript of an undated speech, late 1830s, Daniel Ullman Papers, New York Historical Society. See also Kruman, Marc, Parties and Politics in North Carolina, 1836–1865 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1983)Google Scholar.
10. Jeffrey, Thomas, unpublished manuscript, revision of “The Second Party System in North Carolina, 1836–1860” (Ph.D. diss., Catholic University, 1976)Google Scholar, chap. 7; Dayton (Ohio) That Same Old Coon, no. 13, August 10, 1844; Albany (New York) 1Rough Hewer, August 27, 1840.
11. “Proceedings and Address of … the Massachusetts Whigs, 1839” (Boston, 1839), 24. “Address and Resolutions Adopted at the Whig State Convention, Worcester, October 3, 1849,” (Boston: 1849), 1; Albany (New York) Atlas and Argus, March 31, 1856; Culter, Wayne, ed., The Correspondence of James K. Polk, 6 vols. (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1969–1983)Google Scholar, 5:653. Campbell, Ballard, Representative Democracy: Public Policy and Mid-western Legislatures in the Late Nineteenth Century (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1980), 11CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12. Polsby, Nelson W., “The Instkutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives,” American Political Science Review 62 (03 1968): 144–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Polsby, Gallaher, Miriam, and Rundquist, Barry S., “The Growth of the Seniority System in the U.S. House of Representatives,” American Political Science Review 63 (06 1969): 787–807Google Scholar; Bogue, Allan G., Clubb, Jerome M., McKibbin, Carroll R., and Traugott, Santa A., “Members of the House of Representatives and the Process of Modernization, 1789–1969,” Journal of American History 63 (09 1976): 275–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brady, David, Cooper, Joseph, and Hurley, Patricia A., “The Decline of Party in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1887–1968,” Legislative Studies Quarterly 4 (08 1979): 381–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar.