------------ 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
|