------------ EH.NET BOOK REVIEW --------------  
Published by EH.NET (October 2006)  
  
Nicholas Onuf and Peter Onuf, _Nations, Markets, and War: Modern   
History and the American Civil War_. Charlottesville, VA: University   
of Virginia Press, 2006. xii + 362 pp. $45 (hardcover), ISBN:   
0-8139-2502-9.  
  
Reviewed for EH.NET by Jane Flaherty, Department of History, Texas   
A&M University.  
  
  
The brothers Onuf move the American Civil War from a national   
struggle to the "larger context of conceptual change" in the Western   
development of liberalism and nations. Modernity, and the modern   
concept of nations and markets, led to the conflagration, according   
to the authors. "The outbreak of war between great and expansive   
nations is a much more predictable outcome in the modern history of   
the 'civilized West,'" they suggest (pp. 179-180). Thus the American   
Civil War represents not just a "war between the states" but the   
culmination of this trajectory. "Our contention," they declare, "is   
that these developments were not only historically contingent but   
that they could only have taken place at a specific moment in the   
rise of a liberal world of national markets and international   
exchange, of an international society of bellicose yet civilized   
nations" (p. 177). Far more than a study of Civil War causation, this   
book reflects deeply upon the forces that shaped this "modern   
history." This masterful book moves the American Civil War from a   
national tragedy to part of the broader development of western,   
liberal nations, and the markets that served, and were serviced, by   
these nations.  
  
Nicholas Onuf, Professor Emeritus of International Relations at   
Florida International University, and Peter Onuf, the Thomas   
Jefferson Memorial Foundation Professor of History at the University   
of Virginia, are two of the most respected scholars in their   
respective fields. This book represents their second collaboration,   
"as equals in ignorance," focusing on the impact of the American   
republic on the "liberal world order in the nineteenth century" (p.   
ix). They unleash a tremendous wealth of knowledge in this study, and   
students of both American history and European economic thought and   
intellectual history will find much to digest on each page.  
  
They have divided the manuscript into two parts. Part I traces the   
development of "Liberal Societies" (Chapter 2) and "Civilized   
Nations" (Chapter 3). "Europeans told themselves that engaging in   
commerce and war had made their nations more advanced -- more   
civilized," the Onufs argue (p. 95). Yet, this concept of what   
constituted a civilized nation exacerbated the sectional tension in   
the United States. "Two nations [within the U.S.] developed because   
of slavery. One defined itself as civilized because slavery gave it a   
prosperous economy, a genteel ruling elite, and a secure place in the   
liberal world. The other defined itself as civilized because   
commercial and industrial prowess secured its place in that same   
world" (p. 81). For this reason, they digressed into war, "the one to   
save the union and the other to save itself" (p. 108). In Chapter 4   
they link this development to Adam Smith and other European   
enlightenment thinkers' concept of "Moral Persons." Finally, in   
Chapter 5, they show how northern and southern Americans expanded   
this concept into the intellectual framework of "think[ing]   
themselves a people" (p. 145).  
  
Peter Onuf's very visible hand is seen in Part II, which traces how   
"nationalist thinking" and the "consciousness" about "nationhood"   
pushed the United States to secession then war (p. 181). Chapters 6   
and 7 examine how Adam Smith's ideas of trade and markets influenced   
American political economy, most notably Thomas Jefferson and the   
National Republicans' "oscillation between his republican optimism   
... and geopolitical realism" regarding trade and national economic   
development. "Could Americans trade freely with Europeans without   
compromising their independence?" the Onufs ask. "This simple   
question divided Americans along sectoral and sectional lines in the   
antebellum years and ultimately eroded the foundations of their   
union," they suggest (p. 224-25). Chapter 8 chronicles the debates   
that followed over protection and free trade, with the authors noting   
the symbiotic relationship between protection and warfare.   
"Protectionists would prepare for war in order to secure true   
national independence and a more durable peace," (259) whereas "free   
traders inverted protectionist logic at every point," arguing that   
"protectionism was the second coming of mercantilism" (p. 272). In   
Chapters 9 and 10, the authors chart the development of the national   
identities of the North and South. "On the eve of Civil War,   
Americans no longer shared the founders' fears of descending into a   
Hobbesian war of all against all," the authors posit (p. 312). For   
Northerners, "preservation of the union meant war and success in war   
required the development of the modern, protective, war-making state   
protectionists had long advocated" (p. 303). Southerners "relocated   
the national ideal," in part by moving towards commercial expansion   
in the late antebellum, and less surprisingly, by allowing "slavery   
to define the emergent southern nation" (p. 337). Thus, the brothers   
conclude, the "first fully modern war was the Civil War fought within   
the boundaries of the United States" (p. 345) yet with roots that   
stretched deeply into western concepts of nations, markets and war.  
  
This book has some flaws. Primarily, it reads like a collection of   
essays rather than one narrative. The authors describe the book as   
"an essay in modern history" (p. 21). However, the overall package   
seems disjointed in places. Second, their thesis would need further   
buttressing if brought back into the broader discussion of   
nineteenth-century European history. For example, could not the   
Crimean War, which preceded the American Civil War and pitted   
national commercial interests of Britain and France against those of   
Russia, also fit the authors' rubric of nations, markets, and wars?   
Finally, how could a book so rich in intellectual resources be   
published without a bibliography? Graduate students in particular   
will sorely miss not having a list of the rich bibliographic   
resources the authors use throughout.  
  
What does this book offer the economic historian? First, it provides   
a thorough analysis of the development of transnational economic   
thought in the eighteenth century, and how this influenced antebellum   
American political economy. Their vigorous discussion of   
protectionism and free trade beliefs will challenge future writings   
on American tariff policy. Finally, they provide an economic context   
to the American Civil War that goes far beyond the Beardian   
determinism.  
  
  
Jane Flaherty is the Assistant Director of Graduate Studies in the   
Department of History at Texas A&M University. Her book, _The Revenue   
Imperative: Union Financial Policy during the American Civil War_,   
will be published by Pickering and Chatto in 2008.  
  
Copyright (c) 2006 by EH.Net. All rights reserved. This work may be   
copied for non-profit educational uses if proper credit is given to   
the author and the list. For other permission, please contact the   
EH.Net Administrator ([log in to unmask]; Telephone: 513-529-2229).   
Published by EH.Net (October 2006). All EH.Net reviews are archived   
at http://www.eh.net/BookReview.  
  
-------------- FOOTER TO EH.NET BOOK REVIEW  --------------  
EH.Net-Review mailing list  
[log in to unmask]  
http://eh.net/mailman/listinfo/eh.net-review