A Republic of Men: The American Founders, Gendered Language, and Patriarchal Politics 9780814763520

Citation preview

A Republic of Men

A Republic of Men The American Founders, Gendered Language, and Patriarchal Politics

Mark E. Kan n

NEW YOR K U N I V E R S I T Y PRES S New York and London

N E W YOR K U N I V E R S I T Y PRES S New York and Londo n © 199 8 by New York Universit y All right s reserve d Library o f Congress Cataloging-in-Publicatio n Dat a Kann, Mar k E . A republi c o f men : the American founders , gendere d language , an d patriarchal politic s / Mar k E . Kann . p. cm . Includes bibliographica l reference s (p . )an d index . ISBN 0-8147-4713- 2 (clot h : acid-free paper ) : ISBN 0-8147-471 4 o (pbk . : acid-free paper ) 1. Politica l culture—Unite d States—History—18t h century . 2. Politica l science—Unite d States—History—18t h century . 3. Men—Unite d States—History—18t h century . 4. Patriarchy—Unite d States—History—18t h century . 5. Se x role—United States—History—18t h century . 6. Socia l role—Unite d States—History—18t h century . I . Title. JK54K26 199 8 305.32'o973'o9033—dc2i 97-4539 9 CIP New York University Pres s books ar e printed o n acid-fre e paper , and thei r bindin g material s ar e chosen fo r strengt h an d durability . Manufactured i n th e Unite d State s o f America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

For my family

Contents

Preface

ix

Introduction

i

i

The Culture of Manhood

5

2

The Grammar of Manhood

30

3

The Bachelor and Other Disorderl y Men

52

4

The Family Man and Citizenshi p

79

5

The Better Sort and Leadershi p

105

6

The Heroic Man and National Destin y

130

7

The Founders' Gendered Legacy

155

Notes Bibliography Index About the Author

179 219 231

238

Vll

Preface

I starte d thi s boo k i n 1986 . After doin g som e initia l research , I began to write an introductory chapter meant to create a context for examin ing the American founders' constructio n o f gender and politics. My idea was to explore the gendered basis of seventeenth-century Englis h political theor y and th e gendere d evolutio n o f nineteenth-century American culture . Build ing on the past and anticipating the future, I would then focus the main analysis on ho w the founders inherited , adapted , altered , an d bequeathed patriar chal politics durin g th e late eighteenth century . Alas, the bes t laid plan s . . . By the tim e I ha d drafte d th e first chapte r an d divide d i t i n two , an d the n again several times, my introductory chapter had become a book. On the Man Question: Gender and Civic Virtue in America was published i n 1991. At that point, I focused directl y on the writings and speeches of the American founders. I was intrigued by their language. Many of them were obsessed with democratic disorder i n the ranks of men. They developed and deploye d a "grammar of manhood" that provided informal rule s for stigmatizing disorderly men, justifying citizenshi p for deserving men, and elevating exceptional men to positions of leadership and political authority. Importantly, th e terms they used to stigmatize disorderly men (e.g. , effeminacy), characteriz e citizenship (e.g. , manly freedom), and legitimiz e politica l leadershi p (e.g. , civic fatherhood) preclude d women fro m participatin g in what became a republic of men. I decide d t o focu s thi s boo k o n ho w th e founders ' gendere d languag e and concepts shaped their patriarchal politics. I presented aspects of my research in a series of conference paper s that explored th e founders ' gendere d languag e an d politics . Earl y comment s fro m Shane Phelan , Christin e D i Stefano , an d especiall y Paulin e Schloesse r en couraged m e t o broade n m y focus an d refin e m y analysis. Later remark s b y Kirstie McClure and Kathy Ferguson were important t o the revision process. Booth Fowler , Judith Grant , an d Robi n Roman s rea d rough draft s o f several chapters, persuadin g m e t o tempe r som e claim s an d investigat e others . Michael Kimmel's reading of the full first draft provided a useful sense of what

IX

x I Preface

was still missing, while Harry Brod s superb critique of the entire manuscrip t guided m e throug h th e nex t roun d o f research an d revisions . Kevin White' s thorough an d informe d readin g o f the penultimate draf t wa s the basi s for a final set of revisions. I thank all of these scholars for their time, energy, interest, and insights. Two aspect s o f this researc h hav e been previousl y published . "Manhood , Immortality, an d Politic s durin g th e American Founding, " Journal of Mens Studies 5, 2 (November 1996) , weaves together a number o f loose threads t o show how the founders relie d on the idea of immortality to temper individu alism and promote public order. "The Bachelor and Other Disorderl y Men," Journal of MensStudies 6, 1 (August 1997) , explores the founders' portrai t o f male marginality and examines its relationship to family, citizenship, and political leadership . I a m immensel y gratefu l t o Journal of Mens Studies editor James Doyle for his wisdom, collegiality, and flexibility. I a m tempte d t o spell out i n detai l how important m y wife an d so n have been t o th e thinkin g tha t wen t int o thi s book , th e proces s o f writing an d rewriting it, and the fact that it is now completed. Instead, let me simply say, Kathy and Simon, I love you.

Introduction

The American founders aspire d to create a republic of men. Their problem was that a democratic distemper infecte d th e men o f their time , resulting in disorderly conduct tha t threatened th e republic's birth, health, an d longevity. Th e founder s addresse d thi s proble m b y employin g hegemoni c norms of manhood t o stigmatize and brin g into line disorderly men, rewar d responsible me n wit h citizenship , an d empowe r exceptiona l me n wit h posi tions o f leadership an d authority . On e resul t was that thei r republi c presupposed and perpetuated women's exclusion from politics . My thesis is that th e founders employe d a "grammar of manhood" to encourage American men to reform themselves , t o restor e orde r t o th e hierarchica l rank s o f men, an d t o foster socia l stability, political legitimacy, and patriarchal power . The American founders' political aspirations were framed b y manhood in two ways. First, the founders sought liberty, equality, and citizenship for American males. They inherited an d accepte d patriarcha l laws , institutions, an d values that portrayed politics as an exclusive male enterprise that precluded women's participation i n public life. Theorists such as Louis Hartz and historians such as Bernard Bailyn have presumed that early American political thought was a discourse among men about men. More recently, scholars such as Linda Kerber and Joan Hoff have exhumed the founders' gendere d language to demonstrate tha t the y define d mal e citizenshi p i n oppositio n t o womanhood. Th e founders' origina l intent, then , was to create and sustain a republic based on male governance and female subordination . Second, th e founders mad e politica l distinction s amon g men . Mos t obvi ously, they elevated white males to rights-bearing citizens and at the same time devalued African males as dependents and Indian males as aliens. They also debated th e implication s o f distinguishing propertie d an d unpropertie d males . The Englis h freeholde r traditio n reserve d citizenshi p fo r me n o f substantia l property because they alone were trusted to be independent an d interested in the publi c good . Bu t som e American leader s suggeste d tha t a young man' s

i

2 I Introduction

coming of age could be a sufficient qualificatio n fo r citizenship and that other factors, suc h a s tim e o f residence , famil y status , occupation , an d futur e prospects, might be taken into account. Ultimately, the founders intende d t o establish a republic of men based on some men's rights and authority . But whic h men ? Simpl y askin g th e questio n suggest s tha t th e founders ' rhetoric o f liberty an d equalit y shoul d no t b e taken a t fac e value. Certainly , the founder s committe d themselve s t o th e democrati c propositio n tha t al l men were created free and equal and could not be governed without their own consent. Simultaneously, they did not believe that "all men," or even "all white men" o r "al l white Protestan t men, " coul d b e truste d wit h equa l libert y o r equal citizenshi p o r equa l authority . They coul d no t imagin e a "rankless re public." Most founder s though t th e majorit y o f males were passionat e crea tures who converted liberty into license, perverted equality into leveling, and subverted republica n order . Many were obsessed with democratic disorder in the ranks of men and sought to control it. Whether Americas disorderl y males could b e trusted with citizenshi p de pended, in part, on whether they measured u p to contemporary standards of manhood. Were they able to combine independence and self-restraint? Coul d they reconcil e famil y responsibilit y with fraterna l civility ? Di d the y demon strate a capacity to exercise rights but defe r t o legitimate leaders? There were no easy answers, particularly as the meanings of manhood shifte d durin g the founding era . The ideal of the traditional patriarch was destabilized by significant change s i n gende r relationships . American s debated , fo r example , whether a mature man ruled his family with an iron fist or a velvet glove. Disputed images of manhood were further complicate d b y nuances of class, religion, race, and region. After th e Revolution, evangelicals identified manhoo d with restored patriarchal prerogative whereas artisans equated manhood wit h "the assertio n o f the autonomou s individua l ove r an d abov e th e patriarcha l pretensions of the merchant elite." 1 Americas culture of manhood was a complex, diverse, and contested arena . Nevertheless, th e subtex t o f American manhoo d wa s remarkabl y stable . Americans agreed that manhood demande d economi c and political indepen dence, o r "manl y freedom. " The y marke d ou t pathway s t o manhoo d tha t commonly passe d throug h marriag e an d fatherhood . Joh n Witherspoo n spoke for his contemporaries when he linked manhood t o tempering the passions of "the single life," recognizing "the necessity of marriage," and becom ing a father wh o "subdue s selfishness " i n parentin g hi s children . American s also defined manhood in opposition to womanhood. Being a man meant governing female dependents and exhibiting the manly virtue and merit that con-

Introduction I 3

trolled alleged female vices such as deceit and corruption. The consensual core of early American manhood was the conviction that young males should mature into independent famil y patriarchs who governed female dependents. 2 Like most elites, the American founders dre w on cultural complexities and consensual norm s t o establis h an d maintai n thei r hegemony . I n particular , they employed a "grammar o f manhood" t o promote publi c quiescence, en courage popula r consent , justif y leadership , an d stabiliz e politica l authority . They used gendered language to stigmatize disorderly males and democrats as effeminate an d childish, to encourage them to settle into family responsibilit y and sober citizenship, to foster fraterna l trus t betwee n citizen s and thei r representatives, and to legitimize the extralegal prerogative of exceptional leaders. The founders ' gramma r o f manhood functione d a s the conservativ e cor e o f early American liberalism . It was not planne d o r systematic, but i t was suffi ciently coherent an d compelling to communicate criteri a for excludin g some males, includin g others , an d elevatin g a fe w t o politica l prominenc e an d power. At times, the founders were self-conscious abou t relating manhood t o politics. Thomas Paine published Common Sense to awaken Americans from "un manly slumbers" and shame men into defending th e liberty earned by forefa thers, enjoyed by families, and owed to posterity. Stanley Griswold condensed a call for men s self-discipline agains t political factionalism b y making a plain but pertinent plea : "Oh Americans! Be men." Most of the time, however, th e founders wer e no t self-consciou s abou t using gendere d languag e t o explai n the political world. They simply found i t natural an d appropriate , fo r exam ple, to applaud "this manly, this heroic, and truly patriotic spirit" of American militiamen an d t o condem n th e "effeminat e an d delicat e soldiers " o f th e British army.3 Self-conscious or not, nearly all founders relied on the grammar of manhood to convey the message that manly courage in the struggle for liberty and manl y self-restraint i n th e exercis e of liberty were the essence of republican citizenship . Women nee d not apply. Chapter 1 explores the culture of manhood i n eighteenth-century America by identifying shifting and stable elements in gender relations that linked the language of manhood t o politics. Chapter 2 examines the founders' gramma r o f manhood—the hegemonic norms, language, and rules they employed to promote public quiescence and justify leadership. Chapters 3-6 focus on how the founders applie d the grammar of manhood t o reform disorderl y men, restor e order in the hierarchical ranks of men, and legitimize political leadership and authority. Chapte r 3 looks a t "th e Bachelor " an d othe r disorderl y me n wh o

4 I Introduction

provoked th e founders' exclusionar y tendencies . Chapte r 4 discusse s "th e Family Man" as a symbol of male maturity in the service of citizenship. Chapter 5 considers the founders' commitmen t t o "the Better Sort" of men as leaders and lawmakers. Chapter 6 analyzes the figure of "the Heroic Man," whose exceptional manhood an d leadership abilities qualified hi m to exercise an extralegal prerogative to resolve crises and procreate a promising future fo r posterity. Chapte r 7 conclude s b y considerin g ho w th e founders ' hegemoni c norms continu e t o orde r men' s relations , restrai n democracy , an d devalu e women's place in modern American politics.

1 The Culture of Manhood

Judith Sargen t Murra y onc e instructe d he r readers , "Le t ever y American pla y th e ma n fo r hi s country." 1 Th e phras e wa s a commo n one . Writers an d speaker s employed i t to motivat e young males to qui t thei r disorderly ways, measure up to standards of manhood, an d fulfill thei r duties as citizens. What did "play the man" mean? How did manhood relate to politics? In th e last half of the eighteenth century , th e American cultur e of manhoo d was a complex discursive arena composed o f contested ideal s and consensua l norms tha t th e American founder s molde d int o a relatively coherent "gram mar o f manhood" tha t define d citizenshi p an d legitimize d leadershi p i n th e new republic.

The Traditional Patriarch Early Americas dominant ideal of manhood was the traditional patriarch who devoted himsel f t o governin g his famil y an d servin g his community. E . Anthony Rotundo describes the traditional patriarch as "a towering figure... th e family's unquestione d ruler. " H e exhibite d exemplar y self-contro l an d littl e visible emotion. H e might expres s "approval or disapproval i n place of affec tion o r anger " an d gover n famil y dependent s throug h "persuasio n an d sym pathy," but he also could issue edicts and enforce his will with coercive power and corporal punishment. The traditional patriarch governed his "little commonwealth" by supervising his wife's piety and productivity, and by managing his sons ' educatio n an d children' s marriage s t o perpetuat e hi s famil y line . Though hi s authority was nearly absolute, a family father was accountable t o church officials an d civic leaders, who sought to ensure the "good order in the home" they thought essential to social harmony and the public good. 2 American culture encouraged young males to discipline desire, marry early, sire legitimat e offspring , an d matur e int o traditiona l patriarchs . Protestan t clergy counseled youth o n marita l dut y as an alternative t o sexual promiscu -

5

6 I The Culture of Manhood

ity o r priestl y chastity . Durin g th e Grea t Awakening , Susa n Juste r reports , Congregational ministers worried that New Light spiritual individualism, disregard for authority, and emotionalism fostered " a kind of sexual anarchy," "a potential for sexual libertinism," and "a sexualized climate" subversive of family stabilit y an d publi c order . Th e prope r wa y t o transfor m mal e lus t int o virtue wa s t o channe l i t int o monogamou s marriag e an d sublimat e i t int o family responsibility. Secular wisdom also urged young men into marriage. A Virginian communicate d commo n sens e o n th e subjec t i n 177 9 b y stating , "No man who has health, youth, and vigor on his side can when arrived to the age of manhood d o without a woman." I n turn , marriag e focused mal e passion o n famil y duty . Nancy Cot t observes , "Marriag e was seen a s a relationship i n which th e husband agree d t o provid e food , clothing , an d shelte r fo r his wife, and she agreed to return frugal management , an d obedient service." Fundamentally, "t o 'act like a man mean t to support one s wife." 3 Not all young males could act like a man. Mary Noyes Silliman counsele d her sons to "la y a foundation i n subsistence" before contemplatin g marriage . That wa s especially difficul t whe n father s withhel d th e lan d an d patrimon y that sons needed to support a family, or when fathers had little or no realty to transmit t o thei r sons . Still , fe w writer s sa w economi c wan t a s prohibitive . Benjamin Franklin argue d tha t an y poor, hardworking young man coul d acquire enough land to start a family. Georg e Washington applaude d the opening of the Ohio Valley as an opportunity for "the poor, the needy, and the oppressed" t o ow n lan d an d star t families . Thoma s Jefferso n justifie d th e Louisiana Purchase , i n part , a s enabling "everyon e who wil l labo r t o marr y young and to raise a family o f any size." The choice of marriage was a differ ent matter for servants, apprentices, and slaves, who needed their masters' permission t o marry ; but master s such a s Thomas Jefferson approve d o f dependent marriages as a means to tame male passions and mak e male slaves more obedient and reliable. 4 The reputed "tamin g effect" o f marriage threatened t o subject young men to th e manipulativ e power s o f potentiall y domineerin g women . Joh n Gre gory's popula r advic e boo k A Father's Legacy to His Daughter admonishe d against women's tendency to abuse their power "over the hearts of men," and Pennsylvania Magazine sounded a n alert against "ba d wives [who ] flatter and tyrannize over men o f sense." Alas, marriage exposed men t o female tyranny . One counterresponse was to define manhood a s tyranny over women. American fiction embodied figures such as Hannah Webster Foster s Peter Sanford , a coxcomb who saw overcoming obstacles to the sexual conquest o f an innocent girl as "the glory of a rake," and Judith Sargent Murray's Sinisterus Court-

The Culture of Manhood I 7

land, a rogue who squandered hi s patrimony, fel l into debt, and tried "t o extricate himself by . . . deluding some woman whose expectations were tolerable int o a n affai r o f the heart." 5 A Active war o f the sexes was waged b y seductive coquettes and deceitful libertines . Mainstream cultur e condemne d bot h th e coquett e an d th e libertin e bu t condoned the notion that men needed to restrain disorderly women. The preferred mean s o f restrain t wer e parenta l educatio n an d marita l supervision. Laurel Thatcher Ulric h write s tha t colonia l parent s sough t t o instil l i n thei r daughters virtues such as "prayerfulness, industry , charity, [and ] modesty." At an appropriat e age , young wome n wer e t o marr y an d submi t t o thei r hus bands' authority. A well-bred wife did not tyrannize over her husband; nor did a manly husban d fea r "bondage " fro m hi s wife. Benjami n Frankli n asserte d that "ever y man tha t reall y is a man" would b e "master of his own family." I f he marrie d a "difficult girl, " he stil l was expected t o "subdu e eve n th e mos t restless spirits " an d transfor m a n unrul y spous e int o a virtuous "helpmeet " who practice d piety , gav e birth , nurse d infants , educate d children , cooked , healed, manufactured, manage d servants, grew food, tende d livestock, trade d in the marketplace, worked i n the family shop, took in boarders, or engage d in paid employment. The precis e nature an d degre e of a husband s authority varied by religion, race , ethnicity, class , and region , but th e legitimacy of his family sovereignty was everywhere secured by law and custom. 6 A major motiv e for young men to marry was to procreate legitimate sons. John Demos explains that the traditional patriarch sired, raised, and educated sons to continue his "accomplishments, indeed his very character, into the fu ture." The Reverend John Robinson noted that grandfathers often were "more affectionate toward s their children's children tha n t o their immediates a s seeing themselves further propagate d in them, and by their means proceeding to a further degre e of eternity, which all desire naturally, if not in themselves, yet in thei r posterity. " A concerned fathe r mad e sacrifice s t o provisio n an d pro tect sons and, in turn, expected to achieve a sense of immortality through his children. Contemporar y testamentar y practices indicate d tha t norther n me n tried to extend family dynasties for on e generation an d southern me n hope d to perpetuate the m eve n longer. The convictio n tha t father s wer e deeply devoted to their posterity suggested that they had an enduring stake in the community that justified citizenship . Accordingly, New York artisans proposed i n the 1760s that "ever y man who honestly supports a family b y useful employ ment" should have the right to vote and hold office. 7 The traditional patriarch's performance as husband and father was his main contribution t o the community. Men with marital responsibilities disciplined

8 I The Culture of Manhood

their passions; husbands who were masters of a household restrained women's disorderly conduct ; an d responsibl e father s produce d son s likel y t o matur e into trustworth y citizens . Also , th e traditiona l patriarc h represente d hi s household i n th e variou s hierarchie s tha t ordere d th e large r society . Thi s meant, among other things, that he recognized, respected, and deferred t o his superiors—the "fathers " and "tender parents" of his communal family. 8

Destabilizing Traditional Patriarchy The ideal of the traditional patriarch was destabilized between 1750 and 1800 when, Jay Fliegelman suggests, Americans began to surrender "a n older patriarchal family authority" in favor of "more affectionate an d equalitarian" fam ily relationships.9 English Whig ideology and disputed gender relations, a gap between American patriarchal ideals and actual gender relations, and dynamic economic chang e contribute d t o a weakening o f the traditiona l patriarc h a s the dominant ideal of manhood. The result was not the elimination of the old ideal but the emergence of several alternative ideals. England transmitte d t o America a mixed image of manhood. O n th e one hand, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Englishmen legitimized the traditional patriarc h an d authorize d hi m t o rul e famil y dependent s wit h almos t "absolute authority." He managed a wife whose lot was "perpetual pregnancy" to multipl y he r husband's perso n "b y propagation." H e supervise d hi s sons' upbringing to ensure they would mature into responsible stewards of the family dynasty. The exemplary patriarch spoke with an upper-class accent, but his authority trickled down so that even "lower-class household rulers" were considered mor e manl y an d matur e tha n "peer s wh o wer e stil l i n servic e an d lacked families of their own." English writers agreed that a "well-ordered fam ily," with an "orderly head" and "orderl y members," was "the basis of the entire social order." 10 On the other hand, the Whig attack on absolute kingship generated doubts about all absolute authority. Algernon Sidney , James Tyrrell, and John Lock e vested familia l authorit y i n th e traditiona l patriarc h bu t the y als o sought t o limit paterna l powe r t o preven t domesti c tyranny . They experimente d wit h the idea of marriage as a negotiable contrac t tha t coul d b e terminated i n divorce; they emphasized a husband's duties toward his wife; and they declared adult son s t o b e fully fre e an d equa l men . Also, they allowe d fo r occasiona l state intervention t o prevent and punish patriarchal abuses and even contemplated instances when female sovereignty and filial rebellion were justified. 11

The Culture of Manhood I 9

Popular pamphleteer s pushe d furthe r i n thi s direction . Mar y Astell com pared tyrannica l husband s t o tyrannica l king s an d suggeste d tha t wive s i n families deserve d th e sam e right s tha t Whig s claime d fo r me n i n politics . Other writer s complaine d o f "foolish , passionate , stingy , sottish " husband s who thought themselve s "free from al l restraints." They needed to be less authoritarian an d more respectful an d loving toward thei r wives. In th e changing family, writes Lawrence Stone, "The authority of husbands over wives and of parents ove r childre n decline d a s greater autonom y wa s granted t o o r assumed by all members of the family unit. There were the beginnings of a trend toward greater legal and educational equality between the sexes. . . . Although the economic dependence of these women o n their husbands increased, the y were granted greate r status and decision-makin g powe r within th e family." 12 This emergin g companionat e idea l suggeste d a new mode l o f husband-wif e relations, plus a new understanding of father-son relations . The Whig notion tha t fathers an d adult sons were equals weakened pater nal authority. Fathers had only a few years to leave an imprint on sons befor e the latte r becam e autonomou s men . Unfortunately , tha t imprin t wa s ofte n one of neglect and abuse. James Harrington reporte d that "innumerable children com e t o ow e thei r utte r perdition " t o father s wh o ignore d the m an d thereby exposed them to excessive maternal indulgence. John Locke was particularly appalled by fathers whose poor parenting skills "weaken and effemi nate" thei r sons . H e propose d a theor y o f psychologica l fatherhoo d t o strengthen intergenerationa l bonds , so that a father coul d train a son to ma ture into a proper heir and an "affectionate frien d when he is a man." The traditional patriarch' s stric t authorit y ove r hi s son s wa s graduall y transforme d into mere influence ove r them. 13 Gordon Schochet concludes that the Whig "rejection o f absolute fatherl y authority" was more symptomatic "of what was coming rather than . . . [of ] what ha d alread y take n place. " Wha t wa s comin g finall y arrive d whe n Americans adapte d Whig rhetori c to loca l conditions. I n 1764 , James Otis , Jr., resurrecte d a century-old lin e o f questioning: "Ar e not wome n bor n a s free a s men? Would i t not b e infamous t o assert that th e ladies are all slaves by nature?" A decade later, Thomas Pain e denounced me n who abuse d pa triarchal authorit y t o play th e "tyrant " an d kee p wome n "i n a state o f de pendence" akin t o slavery . H e urge d me n t o giv e more recognitio n an d re spect t o women . Th e nex t year , Abigail Adam s calle d i t indisputabl e tha t men ha d bee n "naturall y tyrannical " t o women . Sh e wante d husband s t o "give up th e harsh titl e of master fo r th e more tender an d endearin g one of friend" an d t o treat wives not a s "vassals" but a s "under your protection." 14

io I The Culture of Manhood

In America a s in England , Whi g rhetori c generate d skepticis m o f vast au thority. Whig rhetoric also called attention t o a gap between the ideal of the traditional patriarc h an d th e everyda y reality of gender relations . Kennet h Lock ridge agrees that traditional patriarchs were expected t o control "al l things in their households." However, even within a context of domination an d subordination, wome n wer e historica l agent s with "substantia l power. " They ha d leverage over men during courtship as well as in their roles as mothers, household managers , laborers, religious activists, and widows who controlled fam ily estates and minor children. The extent of women's agency grew during the Revolution, when women assumed de facto family sovereignty, ran farms and shops, participated in Americas political and military life, and thereby blurred the boundaries between the masculine and feminine. For many men, women's enlarged influence mad e them appear to be especially dangerous, destructive, and disorderly creatures. 15 The ga p betwee n th e patriarcha l idea l an d famil y realit y expanded a s republican values seeped into domestic culture. Criticism of husbands' arbitrary power an d abusiv e treatmen t o f wive s wa s commo n i n eighteenth-centur y America. In 1743, for example, a poet castigated "the tyrant husband" who imposed "fatal bondage" on his wife. In 1759, Annis Boudinot Stockton declared, "Oh men behave like men," to insist that husbands stop degrading their wives and instead cherish their virtues. The Revolution's attack on tyranny in favo r of benevolence weakene d traditiona l patriarcha l authorit y an d strengthene d companionate norm s i n marriage . Judit h Sargen t Murra y wrot e tha t me n "usurped a n unmanl y an d unfounde d superiority " ove r wome n whe n the y ought to strive for "mutual esteem, mutual friendship, mutua l confidence, begirt abou t b y mutual forbearance. " A husband's respec t fo r hi s wife wa s "as tender as it is manly," implying that it was not the stern patriarch but the loving husband who epitomized tru e manhood. 16 The dominan t idea l wa s als o undermine d b y economi c trend s tha t im paired paternal power. The traditional patriarch monopolized contro l of land and comman d o f his children's destinies . However , populatio n growth , economic expansion , an d commercia l developmen t destroye d thi s monopoly . Even affluent father s suffere d a diminished capacit y to transmit lan d t o sons when thei r settlement s becam e densel y populated . I n Dedham , Massachu setts, fo r example , intensifie d lan d us e fostered famil y dispersion . As wealth became more unevenly distributed, poor fathers without land to distribute or bequeath discovere d they had little economic clout. They could not "contro l

The Culture of Manhood I n their sons by promising th e gift o f a farm late r in life." Finally, young men ha d options. Som e settle d western land s t o achiev e "wha t onl y total independenc e would recognize , th e righ t t o shap e thei r ow n communities. " Other s sough t their fortune s i n town s an d citie s where commerc e opene d u p ne w opportu nities for income . Many father s becam e what scholar s cal l "enlightened pater nalists" o r "friendl y paternalists " who relie d o n Locke' s "subtle , psychologica l means" t o maintai n a grip o n thei r posterity. 17 The traditiona l patriarch s authorit y wa s furthe r erode d b y a n emergin g separation o f hom e an d workplace . A s me n bega n t o leav e hom e t o spen d their day s a t separat e workplaces , the y graduall y becam e part-tim e husband s and father s who depende d o n thei r wives to manage thei r households an d par ent thei r children . American s cam e t o believ e tha t men' s day s i n th e market place "depleted " virtu e wherea s wome n an d children' s tim e i n th e domesti c sphere "renewed " it . Wit h father s an d son s occupyin g differen t spatia l an d ethical worlds, fathers bega n t o los e the capacit y to guid e their sons into man hood. Som e critic s questione d whethe r father s tainte d b y socia l vice s shoul d educate thei r sons , an d mos t agree d tha t mother s wer e increasingl y responsi ble fo r promotin g an d protectin g thei r sons ' virtue . Eventually , fathers ' parental authorit y wa s transferre d t o mothers. 18 Some Americans reacte d t o th e destabilizatio n o f the traditiona l idea l wit h what Lockridg e label s "patriarcha l rage. " A youthful Jefferso n filled hi s com monplace boo k with quotation s indicatin g a misogynist hatre d fo r women al lied t o a n ongoin g fantas y "tha t me n coul d reproduc e withou t women. " Jef ferson's youthfu l rag e mature d int o "th e subtl e an d pervers e misogyn y o f th e new democrati c age " manifeste d i n th e nascen t doctrin e o f separat e sphere s which, Nanc y Cot t argues , was a means "t o shor e u p manhoo d (b y differen tiating i t from womanhood ) a t a time when th e traditiona l concomitant s an d supports o f manhoo d . . . wer e bein g undermine d an d transformed. " Ne w England shoemaker s pu t th e doctrin e int o effec t i n th e 1780 s whe n the y began t o se t u p shop s outsid e thei r homes , tak e mal e apprentice s int o thei r shops t o teac h the m th e entir e productio n process , an d recrui t femal e rela tives t o perfor m limite d function s fro m withi n thei r homes . Artisan s rein forced thei r authorit y ove r productio n i n "men' s sphere " an d reaffirme d thei r prerogative t o confin e females , contro l thei r knowledge , an d harnes s thei r labor i n "women' s sphere. " Som e wome n reacte d t o persisten t patriarch y b y opposing marriage . Grac e Gallowa y confide d t o he r journal , "Neve r ge t tie d to a man / fo r whe n onc e yo u ar e yoked / Tis al l a mere jok e / o f seeing you r freedom again." 19

12 I The Culture of Manhood

Alternative Ideals The grea t authorit y o f the traditiona l patriarc h seeme d t o b e at odd s with th e more egalitaria n ethi c of republicanism, bu t th e realit y was more complex . R . W. K . Hinto n remark s tha t patriarcha l father s coul d no t full y rul e thei r fam ilies a s lon g a s the y wer e subjecte d t o th e king' s superio r authority. 20 Thus , when rebelliou s American s attacke d th e monarchy , denounce d centralize d power, an d weakene d externa l control s o n paterna l governance , the y mad e i t easier fo r famil y head s t o exercis e authorit y wit h minima l externa l interven tion. America n la w continue d t o suppor t men s patriarcha l power s i n thei r families wel l beyon d th e eighteent h century . Nevertheless , th e destabilizatio n of the traditiona l idea l diminishe d it s dominance, an d th e Revolutio n stimu lated th e developmen t o f ne w gende r discourse s an d alternativ e model s o f manhood. O n e alternativ e wa s wha t Michae l Kimme l call s th e "aristocrati c man hood" o f th e "th e gentee l patriarch. " A worth y ma n wa s someon e wh o ad hered t o a British upper-clas s cod e of honor, cultivate d manl y sensibilities , relied o n inherite d wealt h o r ren t o n lan d t o suppor t hi s lifestyle , sire d legiti mate mal e heir s t o perpetuat e hi s famil y dynasty , an d promote d civi c orde r through philanthrop y an d publi c service. An American di d no t nee d a title t o achieve aristocrati c manhood , bu t h e foun d i t immensel y helpfu l t o b e bor n into a famil y tha t wa s sufficientl y wealth y an d cultivate d t o provid e hi m a proper libera l education , lesson s i n "manners , taste , and character, " an d suffi cient land an d patrimon y t o becom e a n independen t ma n who establishe d hi s own family , dispense d patronage , an d wielde d loca l authority. 21 Richard Bushma n point s ou t tha t on e parado x o f the Revolutio n wa s tha t patriots associated aristocracy with corruptio n bu t still sought t o capture "aristocratic culture for us e in republican society. " Men o f middling mean s bough t books to teac h themselve s th e details of genteel speech an d conduct ; the y pur chased homes an d object s tha t testifie d t o thei r refined status ; and the y sough t social respectabilit y b y admission t o th e rank s o f polite societ y an d participa tion i n publi c leadership . Eve n "th e rustic, " wrote John Perkins , coul d appre ciate an d emulat e "th e gentl e manne r an d obligin g behavio r o f th e well-bre d and polite. " Often , me n wh o pursue d th e aristocrati c idea l saw women a s fel low traveler s o n th e roa d t o refinement . Timoth y Dwigh t state d tha t refine ment "raise d both me n an d women abov e the brutes . . . t o mak e them kindly , cheerful, an d modest." 22 However, th e attractio n o f aristocrati c manhoo d wa s limited . Me n wh o cultivated thei r sensibilitie s wer e vulnerable t o charge s o f effeminacy . Ameri -

The Culture of Manhood I 1 3

cans made a fine distinction betwee n manl y gentility and unmanl y servitud e to fad an d fashion. G . J. Barker-Benfiel d report s that me n coul d tak e refine ment onl y so far, "o r it would becom e effeminacy." Tha t was why a grandfa ther who noticed his grandsons too great affection fo r his mother worried lest the boy s "affectio n shoul d overcom e hi s manhood. " Furthermore , mal e re finement mean t keepin g up appearances, which coul d b e deceiving. Popula r literature portrayed the licentious libertine as a man with "a polished exterior" that masked an "unmanly ambition of conquering the defenseless," while political commentator s portraye d th e demoni c demagogu e a s a man wh o pre tended refinemen t t o seduce and manipulate the brutish masses. 23 An American male might see k aristocratic manhood fo r himsel f but stil l distrusted it s corrupting influence o n others. Another alternativ e was "republican manhood. " This idea l devalued fam ily background, breeding , wealth , an d manner s t o emphasiz e manl y virtue , sociability, and civic-mindedness. The exempla r o f republican manhoo d wa s the independent farmer who worked his land to ensure his family's subsistence and securit y as well as his sons' patrimony, establishe d kinlik e relation s with neighbors, and participated i n public activities, including militia service . An allied exemplar was the master artisa n who owne d hi s shop, passed o n trad e skills to his sons, earned respect as a useful contributo r to the community, and joined socia l an d politica l organization s committe d t o fosterin g th e publi c good. The republica n farme r o r craftsman mostl y went abou t hi s own busi ness and allowed local elites to conduct public affairs. However , he staked his manly independenc e o n hi s willingness t o challeng e upper-clas s corruptio n and elite domination when necessary. For example, Philadelphia artisans generally deferred t o merchant an d professional leader s but, at crucial moments, organized against them. 24 Fictional representation s o f republica n manhoo d emphasize d virtu e an d independence. I n Royal l Tylers pla y "Th e Contrast, " Colone l Manl y was a model of honesty, courage, and commitment. He respected his ancestors, emulated th e "illustriou s Washington " b y fighting i n th e Revolution , an d de fended libert y for posterity. Manly had an aide but he was no "servant. " The aide affirmed, " I a m a true blu e son o f liberty. . . . Father sai d tha t I shoul d come as Colonel Manlys waiter . . . but no man shall master me." A republican man sought happiness with a republican woman. He kept company with worthy women; admired their virtues more than their beauty; respected their reason, education , an d skills ; married on e out o f mutual affection ; an d the n relied on his republican wife to keep him virtuous and raise patriotic children. Judith Sargent Murray contended that a republican man found fulfillmen t i n

14 I The Culture of Manhood

a companionabl e famil y organize d b y "th e unite d effort s o f mal e an d fe male."25 This ideal was suited to a republican age, but it still failed to become dominant. Male misogyny persisted and periodically resurfaced t o favor the traditional patriarch , fo r example , in post-Revolutio n evangelica l churches . Also, many peopl e doubte d tha t mos t me n coul d o r would liv e up t o republica n standards o f manly virtue. Carolin e Robbin s remind s u s that republicanis m was generally quite elitist, assuming the necessity of a propertied rulin g class to contro l th e "scum " who mad e u p th e democrati c masses . Finally , th e re publican ideal may have been born to obsolescence. Gordon Wood, Joyce Appleby, and John Diggins argue that early Americas republican rhetoric was accompanied b y a mor e powerfu l libera l individualis m an d materialis m tha t guided men's actual conduct. Writers may have felt driven to idealize republican manhood becaus e they sensed its imminent demise. 26 The thir d alternativ e t o th e traditiona l patriarc h wa s "self-mad e man hood." This idea l associated manhoo d wit h individualism , materialism , an d an entrepreneuria l spirit . Th e ne w man-on-the-mak e represse d carnality , avoided alcoho l an d gambling , an d sublimate d hi s desire s int o competitio n for accumulation. He did not oppose the other ideals of manhood so much as harness the m t o hi s ow n economi c ends . H e learne d tha t a reputatio n fo r good manner s an d sobe r moralit y coul d facilitat e commercia l transaction s and business success. Indeed, Americans who exemplified self-made manhoo d eventually transformed aristocrati c sensibilities an d republica n moralit y int o the highly prized "bourgeois respectability" of nineteenth-century America. 27 The self-mad e ma n was not a n isolated , selfish individual . He was a married man who competed in the marketplace to provision and protect his family. He was like George Mason, who explained to his son that he speculated in frontier propert y no t fo r himsel f but t o ensur e his family's comfor t fo r years to come . Furthermore , th e self-mad e ma n heade d a family partnership . H e managed any property his wife brought into the marriage, supervised her paid and unpaid labor during the marriage, detailed her role in transmitting fam ily propert y t o th e nex t generation , an d sometime s organize d an d sol d hi s family's labor at home or in factories. Finally, the self-made man was sociable. He belonge d t o socia l club s an d fraterna l organization s tha t combine d self improvement effort s an d fraterna l camaraderie . These group s ofte n encour aged entrepreneurship bu t usually kept it within th e bounds of civility. 28 Two recen t historie s o f American manhoo d declar e th e "triump h o f th e self-made man " who cultivate d "self-improvement , self-control , self-interest , and self-advancement " i n th e earl y republic . I n fact , th e idea l o f self-mad e

The Culture of Manhood I 1 5

manhood wa s th e mos t controversia l alternative . Writers , ministers , an d politicians equated self-interes t t o selfishness an d factionalism ; the y attacked materialism a s a spur t o greed , gambling , profligacy , luxury , conflict , crime , and violence. Commentators who recognized men's grasping nature as an immutable reality rarely idealized it; instead, they tried to cushion its destructive impact. Certainly , th e idea that me n shoul d b e free t o mak e economic decisions to achieve comfort without political restraint was popularized b y Jeffersonians in the 1790s but, as Louis Hartz has argued, it was not until the midnineteenth centur y that American cultur e was able "to electrify th e democratic individual with a passion for great achievement and produce a personality type that was . . . the hero of Horatio Alger." 29 Americas mainstream culture of manhood was further complicate d by economic, religious, and regional variations of the traditional idea l and it s alternatives. Farmers, artisans , gentlemen, Baptists , Congregationalists, norther n commercial men, southern planters, and various fraternal group s relied on selective aspects of manhood t o isolate dissenters, forge solidarit y in their ow n ranks, buil d influentia l coalitions , an d defea t opposin g interests . Simultane ously, a libertine countercultur e cas t doub t o n al l major variation s o f man hood, whil e th e uncertai n gende r statu s o f African an d India n male s adde d confusion t o the mix. No one knew with confidenc e whether one alternativ e or another would predominate, what syntheses might emerge, or if Americas multiple masculinities pointed in any discernible direction. The contested old ideal endured alongsid e th e competing newe r ones. 30 The chie f limit o n th e cultural diversity of manhood was a general consensus that three norms were central to all manly ideals. One consensua l nor m wa s that manhoo d require d th e economic an d po litical independence sometimes known as "manly freedom." A traditional patriarch relie d on rents ; a male in search of aristocratic manhood was likely to have a profession; a republican farmer worked his land, a craftsman hi s shop; and a self-made man acquired and invested capital. An independent man was self-supporting. H e determined the nature and pace of his labor and kept fre e of others' patronage and government relief . He could afford t o have his own conscience and demanded the liberty to exercise his conscientious will in public. He claimed a right to resist any government that threatened to rob him of liberty and property, and he felt entitled to participate in public deliberations and decision making. A "man" was an independent agen t of his personal an d public destiny. 31 The second consensual nor m was that a mature man was a family man. A traditional patriarch governed a family estate, assisted by his wife and perpet -

16 I The Culture of Manhood

uated b y hi s sons ; a n aspiran t t o aristocrati c manhoo d establishe d a re spectable family dynasty by wedding a genteel lady and teaching proper manners to his children; a republican farme r o r artisan calle d on his wife to con tribute t o family welfare an d passed on his land an d skill s to his sons; a selfmade man entere d int o a lifetime partnershi p with his wife to build a family business and produce sons to sustain and enlarge it. The ubiquitous belief that every man should mature into the head of a family was predicated on the expectation tha t married men were relatively responsible and trustworthy men . For mos t Americans, manhood , marriage , an d stabilit y were nearl y synony mous. The third consensual norm was that manhood opposed womanhood. Joan Gundersen suggest s that Americans use d " a system o f negative reference " t o define manhood . An independen t ma n wa s someone who was not a dependent woman or a slave to "effeminacy." Americans also defined a mature man as someone who controlled women. Many years after th e Revolution, Americans coul d stil l describ e a married ma n a s a "king i n hi s family. " Critic s o f tyrannical husbands rarely questioned their authority over women but simply demanded tha t they conduct themselve s with greater civility toward women. Even Judith Sargen t Murray s argument fo r "Equalit y of the Sexes" conceded male "superiority" to the extent that man was naturally meant to be woman's "protector" and woman was naturally suited to transact "domestick affairs." 32

Manhood as an Oppositional Concept Scholars hav e demonstrate d tha t Wester n cultur e commonl y define d man hood i n oppositio n t o womanhood . Nanc y Hartsoc k write s tha t classica l Greek theorists associated manhood with wisdom, virtue, and citizenship but tied womanhood t o "dangerous , disorderly , an d irrationa l forces " i n conflic t with truth and the public good. Hanna Pitkin reads Machiavelli s republicanism as a story about male protagonists who seek manhood by conquering Fortune a symbol for treacherous women and antagonistic female forces such as sexuality, dependence , seduction , manipulation , fury , mystery , an d chance . Men strive for independence , but Fortuna "threatens a mans self-control, hi s mastery o f his ow n passions. " Men wh o overcom e destructiv e femal e force s achieve the liberty and civi c virtue that constitut e manhood an d citizenship ; those who fai l suffe r persona l instability , socia l disorder, an d politica l chaos . As such, "Th e feminin e constitute s th e othe r . . . opposed t o manhoo d an d autonomy in all their senses: to maleness, to adulthood, to humanness, and to

The Culture of Manhood I 1 7

politics." Carole Pateman provide s a complementary readin g of modern lib eral theor y a s a tal e abou t me n wh o forge a sexual contrac t t o subordinat e women and insulate political society against "the disorder of women," whose "bodily natures and sexual passions" threaten t o subvert the rule of law.33 Similarly, late-eighteenth-century Americans assessed male worth in opposition t o femal e disorders . Carrol l Smith-Rosenber g argue s tha t American s equated manhood t o self-control, productivity , virtue, and independence bu t linked womanhood ( a "negative other") t o seduction, deceit , luxury, and dependence. Lind a Kerbe r dissect s Americans' "gender-specific " citizenshi p t o reveal concepts o f ownership, military service, suffrage, an d civi c virtue tha t wed public life to male prerogative over disorderly women. Ruth Bloc h states that American s reproduce d gende r dominatio n b y urgin g patriot s t o see k manly "glory " an d conque r femal e vice s suc h a s "idleness , luxury , depen dence." Philip Greven suggests that Americans construed th e Revolution a s a choice betwee n republica n "manliness " an d monarchi c "femininity " and , Susan Juster adds, they carried o n th e Revolution "against , not merel y without, women." Joan Gundersen, Christine Stansell, and Judith Shklar all agree that patriots "heightened and reinforced" their claim to independence by contrasting it to female dependence. Joan Hofif contends that the framers institu tionalized mal e rights, interests, and opportunitie s i n a market societ y regulated by a "masculine system of justice" and "the masculinity of the Constitution." Joyce Appleby summarizes the result: "The liberal hero was male." His proper companion, Jan Lewis concludes, was the "republican wife" who managed her family's moral reclamation an d civic education. 34 Scholars o f American manhoo d generall y agree that late-eighteenth - an d nineteenth-century American s perpetuate d gende r opposition . Rotund o identifies th e libera l languag e o f th e foundin g er a with "th e mal e self, " an d Kimmel pinpoints "femininity " a s the "negative pole" against which men defined themselves. David Pug h argues that th e Sons of Liberty displaced thei r anxieties ont o malignan t "femal e qualities " such a s "smothering materialis m and effeminat e inaction, " while Michae l Rogi n suggest s tha t th e Jacksonian Eras male mystique was part of men's struggle "to rescue sons from materna l power." Joe Dubbert characterizes the nineteenth century as an era when male "domination, supremacy , an d control " i n publi c lif e stoo d i n oppositio n t o women's moralis m i n privat e life. Finally , Kimme l an d Pete r Filen e ascribe a late-nineteenth-century "crisi s of masculinity" to male fears that women were making boys effeminate. 35 Remarkably, th e academi c accor d tha t American s define d manhoo d against womanhood is supported by a wealth of cultural evidence but a dearth

18 I The Culture of Manhood

of direct political evidence. One ca n review thousands o f pages of founding era political documents that dwell on virtually every aspect of men's relations without encounterin g more than a rare reference t o women's existence. Political discourse was male-centered, a s if men wer e doing what cam e naturall y when the y presumed t o monopoliz e powe r an d ignor e women's potentia l o r presence a s public persons . Christin e Stansel l point s ou t tha t femal e figures were omnipresent i n literature but "almos t invisible" in politics. The Federalist Papers was typical. It spoke volumes about male power and politics but provided only two tertiary comments about women. When writers and speakers actually injected wome n int o political discourse, they usually did so to mak e a poin t abou t men . Fo r example , John Adam s discusse d women' s exclusio n from suffrag e t o show that unpropertie d me n also should be excluded. Anna Jonasdottir's insigh t int o Hobbe s an d Lock e als o applie s t o Adam s an d hi s contemporaries: "Wome n ar e used as a device of argument onl y to be deftl y shuffled ou t of sight once they have served their purpose." 36 Still, gender opposition di d have a substantial indirect influence o n political discourse. To begin, it shaped the philosophical foundation s o f American political thought. Genevieve Lloyd observes that "the maleness of reason" was deeply embedded in Western political thought. Conceptions of manhood and reason "have been formed within structures of dominance" that declared "the Man o f Reason" superior t o women. Carol e Patema n analyze s early moder n political theory to expose male thinkers' belief that only "men possess the capacities required for citizenship, in particular, they are able to use their reason to sublimate their passions" and "internalize the universal rules of socio-political order." Mal e theorist s believe d tha t women, i n contrast , wer e drive n b y passions that cloude d thei r reason , subverted thei r commitmen t t o universa l justice, and legitimized their exclusion from politics. 37 We can read the indirect influence o f gender opposition betwee n the lines of writings tha t populate d th e state of nature with rationa l me n who volun tarily chose to enter civil society and establish a government of law. American authors usuall y assumed tha t women' s inabilit y t o harnes s reaso n an d disci pline passion precluded them from participation in political life. Women were nowhere to be found in most states of nature. Theophilus Parsons was unusual because he was explicit abou t why political manhoo d require d femal e exclu sion. Parsons emphasized the importance of wisdom, learning, and discretion in politics, an d favore d a presumption tha t al l male s ove r twenty-on e year s had ample intelligence to participate. Simultaneously, he favored the rule that all women be viewed "as not having sufficient discretion, " and he disqualifie d them from politics . True, he argued, women had "no deficiency in their men-

The Culture of Manhood I 1 9

tal powers." However, it was dangerous for them t o develop reason and practice politics les t "promiscuou s intercours e with th e world" rui n "th e natura l tenderness and delicacy of their minds, their retired mode of life, and various domestic duties." 38 Politica l manhoo d mean t rulin g wome n fo r thei r ow n good. Gender oppositio n wa s als o embedde d i n th e psychodynamic s o f earl y American politica l thought. Christin e D i Stefan o argue s that moder n politi cal theorist s constructe d "configuration s o f masculinity " a s misogynis t at tempts t o achiev e "clea n an d ultimat e releas e fro m th e (m)other. " Mal e thinkers desired women but feared dependence on them. They projected thei r "irresolute masculinity" int o political theorie s that thickene d th e connectio n between politica l manhoo d an d femal e subordination . Similarly , Kennet h Lockridge argues that eighteenth-century American males constructed images of manhood base d o n contemp t fo r women . Me n desire d women fo r sexua l pleasure and reproduction bu t feared thei r engulfing sexualit y and malignan t power. Reactin g a s if "patriarchy i s in imminen t dange r o f becoming matri archy," the y expresse d insecurit y an d rag e b y forgin g a misogynisti c publi c identity base d on intimidatio n an d contro l o f women.39 American me n ha d powerful unconsciou s passions and gendered assumption s tha t infuse d patri archal meaning into public phrases such as "All men are created equal." We can glimpse male misogyny in th e common usag e of the term effeminacy. Lind a Kerbe r suggest s that Americans equate d "effeminacy " t o "timid ity, dependence, and foppishness." Fo r example, Samuel Adams opposed "ef feminate" refinements tha t seduced men into the self-indulgence an d corruption associated with disorderly women. Samuel Williams criticized profligat e men for creating "an emaciated feeble race, degraded by effeminacy an d weakness," that was "unmanly" and "incapable of manly exertions." Only men who mastered femal e vices could ward off tyranny and establis h a republic. How ever, not all uses of effeminacy conveyed gender opposition or misogyny. John Adams hinte d a t gende r similarit y when criticizin g bot h "m y ow n sex " an d "American ladies" for "luxury , dissipations, and effeminacy." An d Mercy Otis Warren was not expressing misogyny toward women when criticizing General William Howe for enjoying "effeminate an d reprehensible pleasures . .. i n the arms of a handsome adulteress" rather than doin g his civic duty. 40 We can als o detect gende r oppositio n i n founding-er a metaphors . Speak ers an d writer s ofte n define d politica l manhoo d a s a matte r o f controllin g symbolic femal e figures who wer e typicall y blame d fo r publi c disorder . Th e figures included "Fortune " ( a coy woman who needed to be tamed), "Fancy" (an enchantress), "Trade " ( a lady who neede d t o b e courted), and "Popular -

20 I The Culture of Manhood

ity" (an adulteress). Some oppositional metaphors conveyed a mixed message. Thomas Paine portrayed the Revolution as the struggle of a maturing American mal e against a grasping British mother , an d a s a conflict pittin g patriot s defending manl y freedo m agains t corrup t governor s hopin g t o seduc e the m back into female dependence. Paine also portrayed the Revolution in terms of all-male rivalry. He considered it a filial revolt against a despotic royal father , as well as the case of a wealthy ward fighting off a covetous guardian. Political manhood opposed womanhood , bu t i t als o oppose d mal e tyrann y an d avarice, and an assortment o f male failings. 41 Quite often , American s define d politica l manhoo d i n oppositio n t o African slavery . Judith Shkla r suggest s tha t a white mal e s sense of persona l dignity, social worth, an d citizenship was largely a function o f distinguishing himself "from slave s and occasionally from women." She emphasizes that citizenship was mostly conceived a s a denial o f slavery. White male s measure d their public worth by their distance from slave status. The main marker of that distance was the right to vote, which functioned a s "a certificate o f full mem bership i n society " tha t ha d a "capacity t o confe r a minimum o f social dig nity." Men without th e ballot saw themselves and were seen by other men as second-class citizens approaching "the dreaded condition o f the slave."42 Northern writer s regularl y suggested tha t politica l manhood require d op position t o slavery. James Dana argued that "ou r liberty as men, citizens, and Christians" demanded tha t "w e set ourselves to banis h al l slavish principles" and "unite to abolish slavery." Southern writers often suggeste d that white political manhood was strengthened b y its juxtaposition t o slavery. David Ram say wrote that white men s "spirit of liberty" was nurtured b y daily reminders of the degradation of slavery; Timothy Ford believed that white men felt stimulated t o defen d libert y "t o avoi d bein g confounde d wit h th e blacks" ; John Taylor adde d tha t whit e men s affectio n fo r libert y wa s heightene d b y "th e sight of slavery." If white manhood contrasted with slavery, what was the gender identity of male slaves? Enslaved black males had no clear gender identity. They wer e mostl y see n a s outsider s lackin g th e manl y reaso n t o disciplin e their passions and the manly freedom t o provision and protect their families . J. Hecto r St . John d e Crevecoeur' s "America n Farmer " wa s typical : h e ab horred slavery but could not imagine including African slave s among the mix of immigrants who could "becom e men" within th e new race "called Americans. ^ Often, American s define d manhoo d i n opposition t o boyhood. A mature man wa s a self-supportin g adul t wh o defende d liberty , fulfille d famil y re sponsibilities, and governed women. Hi s opposite was the "boy," "libertine,"

The Culture of Manhood I 2 1

or "bachelor of age" who was lustfixl, impulsive, and avaricious rather than disciplined; self-centered instea d of family-oriented; an d socially destructive, not politically constructive. This contrast was standard fare in political discourse. For example, Noah Webster portrayed the French Revolution as a contest between th e matur e male s who originall y fough t fo r "libert y an d th e right s o f men' and later Jacobin rebels who united "the littleness of boys" with "the barbarity of Goths." Activists criticized political opponents b y likening them t o "giddy youth" or b y patronizing the m a s "restless, vigorous, luxurious yout h prematurely emancipate d fro m th e authorit y o f a parent." 44 Th e idio m o f male rivalry was potent because Americans believed that a "man" deserved the rights of men, but a "boy" needed to be governed. Sometimes, manhood was not a n oppositional concep t bu t a conjunctur e of femal e an d mal e characteristics . America n cultur e considere d bot h me n and wome n t o b e disorderl y creatures , dispose d t o seduc e an d b e seduced . Writers criticized women fo r manipulatin g mal e passions and me n fo r prey ing on female innocence. They worried about young women being corrupted by rogue s an d naiv e mal e citizen s bein g abuse d b y demagogues. Also, bot h sexes seeme d t o share many vices. Benjamin Franklin note d women's intem perance an d men' s "mor e frequent" intemperance , a s well as women's fickleness and men' s "wavering and inconstant " ways. Overall, however, commen tators thought men were the more disruptive sex. The coquette's vices mainly threatened he r own well-being. Hannah Webster Foster' s novel The Coquette tells of a "young, gay , volatile" girl who rejecte d a virtuous suito r fo r " a designing libertine" only to suffer a premature death . By contrast, th e libertin e epitomized wha t Alexande r Hamilto n calle d men' s "ambitious , vindictive , and rapacious" nature which imperiled female innocence, family integrity, the bonds of society, and legitimate political authority. 45 A disorderly female subdued passion and achieved womanhood b y way of marriage, submission t o a husband, and motherhood. A disorderly male subdued passion and achieved manhood b y way of marriage, family responsibil ity, and fatherhood. America's ideal couple produced order and procreated the future. Bu t me n claime d superio r procreativ e powers : the y sire d children , women onl y carrie d them . Jefferson' s fantas y o f me n reproducin g withou t women wa s reflecte d i n Joel Barlow' s satirica l poe m "Th e Hast y Pudding, " where a farmer' s vitalit y (an d virility ) wa s confirme d b y th e fac t tha t "Te n sturdy freeman sprun g from him. " Men als o procreated culture , society, and the nation. Carole Pateman remark s that modern mal e thinkers claimed "th e procreative powers of both a mother an d a father" an d too k credit fo r "mas culine creation of (giving birth to) social and political order."46 In early Amer-

22 I The Culture of Manhood ica's male fantasies, femal e disorder s and procreative powers were inferior; i n early Americas patriarchal politics, disorderly men were the primary problem, procreative men the primary problem solvers.

Disorderly Men The destabilizatio n o f the traditional patriarch , th e emergence of alternative ideals, and the instability of gender relations disrupted th e lives of American men. Satire s mockin g marrie d me n a s bot h bruta l tyrant s an d effeminat e slaves became commonplace. Family mens expectations that they should rule dependents were disappointed in some degree by wives' agency and sons' mobility. Som e me n reacte d wit h a n antimarita l ideology ; other s channele d misogyny into revitalizing the traditional ideal; many experimented with th e new alternatives; and mos t muddle d throug h th e confusion . Commentator s worried tha t gender turbulence erode d men's commitment t o family life an d intensified mal e licentiousness. They warned tha t me n wh o faile d t o marry , refused famil y responsibility, or forswore legitimate fatherhood lacke d proper self-restraint, engage d in destructive vices, and often lure d sober men into depravity. The specter of masses of disorderly men causin g chaos became mor e terrifying to civic leaders when the revolutionary rhetoric of liberty and equality weakened traditiona l restraint s o n mal e conduct an d strengthene d men' s claims to individual rights against authority. In 1766 , Jonathan Mayhe w congratulate d colonist s fo r defendin g libert y against th e Stam p Ac t bu t quickl y condemne d the m fo r "riotou s an d felo nious proceedings" compounded b y cloaking their "rapaciou s violences with the pretext of zeal for liberty." Mayhew warned that some American men had lost "all sense of religion, virtue, and good order" and caused a "state of general disorde r approachin g s o nea r t o anarchy " tha t the y almos t brough t o n "more dreadful scene s of blood and slaughter." For the next forty years, public officials wer e haunted b y visions of disorderly men indulgin g democrati c desire as an excuse for venting passion and renewing earlier scenes of bloodshed and slaughter . I t was not unti l 180 5 that Thomas Jefferson wa s ready to declare a "union o f sentiment no w manifested s o generally as auguring har mony and happines s t o ou r futur e course. " Even then , Fishe r Ames warned that only "grown children" were so foolish a s to believe that men's licentiousness, factionalism, an d mobbish conduct had been cured. 47 Why were men so apt to transform claim s to liberty and equality into disorderly conduct? A frequent explanatio n was that male s were inherently pas-

77?^ Culture of Manhood I 2 3 sionate, lustful , impulsive , greedy , manipulative , unpredictabl e creatures . That is , they were just like women. Benjami n Frankli n highlighte d men' s passionate natur e i n a satire abou t "Celi a Single, " who sough t t o se t straigh t th e public recor d i n a letter t o th e editor : I have several times in your paper seen severe reflections upon us women for idleness and extravagance , but I do not remembe r t o have once seen any such animadversions upon th e men. If I were disposed to be censorious, I could furnis h you with instances enough. I might mention Mr. Billiard who spends more than he earns at the green table . . . Mr. Finikin who has seven different suit s of fine clothes and wears a change every day while his wife and children sit at home half naked... Mr. Crownhim who is always dreaming over the checkerboard... Mr . T'Otherpot th e tavern-hunter. 48 Franklin spen t a lifetim e satirizin g mal e vice s t o mar k ou t th e commo n fail ings o f me n an d women . An d Jefferso n entertaine d th e radica l propositio n that me n wer e mor e enslave d b y ardo r an d ignoranc e tha n women . Hi s cor respondence with Mari a Coswa y proclaime d th e dominio n o f a mans "heart " over his "head," and his educational pla n fo r his daughter assume d a "fourtee n to one " chanc e tha t sh e would marr y " a blockhead" an d b e force d t o manag e her ow n family. 49 Not e tha t Frankli n an d Jefferson wer e optimists abou t mal e virtue and reaso n compare d t o misanthropes suc h a s Alexander Hamilto n an d Noah Webster . A related explanation was that mal e passions were particularly troublesom e at a time when traditiona l restraint s o n mal e conduc t wer e crumbling . Colo nial Americ a ha d bee n dominate d b y tw o rank s o f me n who , accordin g t o Gordon Wood , "ha d differen t psyches , differen t emotiona l makeups , differ ent natures. " Gentlemen wer e "great-souled " me n "drive n b y passions tha t or dinary people could never comprehend, b y pride, by honor, an d b y £ a prospect of a n immortalit y i n th e memorie s o f al l th e worth y t o th e en d o f time.' " Commoners wer e mainl y farmer s whos e live s wer e shape d b y th e nee d t o ex tract a living from th e land t o provision thei r families. What commoner s mos t wanted "wa s sons to whom the y could pas s on thei r lan d an d who would con tinue th e famil y name." 5 0 Thes e tw o rank s wer e boun d togethe r i n equalit y and inequality . They share d responsibilitie s a s famil y father s wh o supported , protected, an d manage d dependents ; the y were freeholders wit h th e historica l rights and responsibilities of Englishmen; an d the y were driven by a shared de sire to produce a memorable patrimon y fo r posterity. Still, gentlemen wer e superiors, commoners inferiors ; gentleme n cultured , commoner s coarse ; gentlemen patrons , commoner s patronized ; gentleme n militi a officers , commoner s

24 I The Culture of Manhood

rank-and-file militiamen ; gentlemen governors , commoners governed. Colonial me n existe d within traditional , comple x hierarchie s constructe d o f per sonal ties , mutual obligations , cultura l rituals , an d th e politics o f preferenc e and deference . However, Americas hierarchica l bond s were comparatively weak. Gentle men had no formal titles , special legal status, or inherited political privileges. They relie d o n famil y name , education, talent , wealth, generosity, an d repu tation to achieve personal honor, social dignity, and political authority. Meanwhile, commoners' subordinat e statu s was compromised b y Americas abun dance o f land , it s opportunitie s fo r socioeconomi c mobility , an d th e rapi d population growt h tha t encourage d youn g me n t o see k opportunity o n th e frontier o r in the city. American colonist s sustained a fragile balanc e between male hierarch y an d socia l fluidity unti l thei r oppositio n t o th e Stam p Ac t overspilled the boundaries of political protest. Thereafter, Bernar d Bailyn suggests, "Defianc e t o constitute d authorit y leape d lik e a spark fro m on e flammable area to another, growing in heat as it went."51 Any systematic effort t o impose order on the ranks of men by subordinating some men an d elevating others was sure to provoke public consternation . On th e on e hand , American s wer e enthusiast s fo r liberty . Indeed , the y claimed exceptional liberty agains t hierarchica l authority . James Otis , Jr., ar gued in 1764, "The colonists are entitled to as ample rights, liberties, and privileges as the subjects o f the mother countr y and, in some respects, to more." Why more? American farmers and English freeholders were born with identical natural an d constitutional rights ; but American me n merite d exceptiona l liberty because they had carved a new world out of the wilderness while Englishmen wallowe d i n old-worl d corruption . I n particular , American s de manded extraordinar y "natural , inherent , an d inseparabl e right s as men an d citizens" to individual liberty against royal governors and to local political autonomy agains t parliamentar y authority . Anyon e wh o appeare d t o depriv e American me n o f their exceptiona l libert y stood accused of seeking to emasculate and enslave them. 52 On th e othe r hand , man y leader s feare d tha t thi s enthusias m fo r libert y generated what David Ramsay called "undecided claims and doubtful rights " that were likely to b e abused b y disorderly men, who excelle d a t "disturbin g the frees t government s tha t were ever devised." Disturbance s ofte n too k th e form o f mob action. John Adams complained i n 1774, "These private mobs I do an d wil l detest . . . . thes e tarrin g an d featherings , thi s breaking ope n o f houses by rude and insolent rabble . .. i n pursuance of private prejudices an d passions must be discountenanced." Georg e Washington was outraged in July

The Culture of Manhood I 2 5

1776 whe n a celebratio n o f independenc e ende d wit h soldier s topplin g a statue o f Georg e III . Hi s "Genera l Orders " stated , "Thoug h th e Genera l doubts no t th e persons who pulle d dow n an d mutilate d th e statue . . . were actuated by zeal in the public cause, yet it has so much the appearance of riot and want o f order . . . that he disapproves th e manner an d direct s in th e fu ture these things shall be . . . left t o be executed by proper authority." 53 Leaders worried that most men recognized no proper authority . How coul d me n reconcil e democrati c desir e an d politica l authority ? Ide ally, men showed self-restraint i n the exercise of liberty and voluntarily obeyed their chosen leaders. However, John Adams felt that patriots' demands for liberty were so excessive that self-restraint an d obedience were doubtful. I n 1776, he used Abigail's plea to remember the ladies as an occasion to express his fear that Americans' revolutionary claims jeopardized all authority: "We have been told that our struggle has loosened the bonds of government everywhere; that children an d apprentice s wer e disobedient ; tha t school s an d college s wer e grown turbulent ; tha t Indians slighted their guardians, and Negroes grew insolent t o thei r masters. " Decade s later , Adams argue d tha t claim s t o libert y had become so extreme that men refused t o defer to superior authority or even recognize their superiors . "Som e years ago," he explained, " a writer unfortu nately made use of the term better sort. Instantly , a popular clamor was raised and an odium excited which remains to this day to such a degree that no man dares to employ that expression at the bar, in conversation, in a newspaper, or pamphlet, no, nor in the pulpit." 54 Critic s lambasted Adams for saying aloud what many leaders quietly believed: American me n were too disorderly to be trusted wit h libert y unles s the y learne d t o tempe r democrati c passion s an d defer t o the better sort . American intellectual s wer e brillian t a t makin g abstrac t distinction s be tween liberty and license to persuade men to temper passion and defer t o authority. Bu t their philosophical analyse s had a little impact o n men' s willingness to exercise self-restraint o r obey government. Abstract political languag e had become so slippery that it was as easily used against as in favor of authority. Terence Ball, J. G . A. Pocock, and Joyce Appleby point out tha t concept s such as "liberty" and "equality" or "republic" and "democracy" were contested, revised, and recoined during the founding era . Most intellectuals did little to clarify thei r language. They were part of what Jay Fliegelman identifie s a s an "elocutionary revolution" that encouraged speakers and writers to de-empha size the clarity, logic, and evidence that appeale d t o men's minds an d instea d to emphasize th e theatricality, metaphor , imagery , myth , an d bod y languag e that moved men's passions. Political leaders seeking to counteract democrati c

i6 I The Culture of Manhood disorders needed to employ language and concepts that appealed to men's passions, indeed, to their very identities as males.55

The Politics of Coercion and Consent The American founder s encompasse d severa l generations o f thinkers, speak ers, writers , ministers , activists , soldiers , an d statesme n wh o conceive d an d contributed t o the struggle for independenc e an d the creation o f the Republic. The y include d loca l an d nationa l politica l elite s wh o oppose d th e ol d regime and constructed ne w ones. Though a diverse lot, the founders share d an enduring an d sometimes obsessiv e fear tha t disorderl y men would gener ate chao s i n society , endange r hard-wo n liberty , an d imperi l th e Republic . They hope d t o fen d of f democrati c disorder s b y stabilizing gende r relation s and by promoting hegemonic norms to stigmatize disorderly men and reward stable men. First, the founders stabilize d gender relations by depoliticizing oppositio n between me n an d women an d b y reinforcing th e ideal of the traditional pa triarch. They mostl y restricte d gende r turbulenc e t o th e cultura l spher e an d thereby fostered fraternal politics . They regularly discussed and debated men's liberty, equality, citizenship, and leadership without mentioning women; they often heape d honor s o n patrioti c me n wh o fough t th e Revolution withou t giving much recognition to patriotic women who participated in it. When the war ended , "Wome n disappeare d fro m th e publi c eye." 56 Thereafter , th e founders framed a new republic without considering women's place in it or experiencing much pressure to question women's exclusion from it . They could perpetuate women's subordination because republican and liberal ideology invited them t o do so, male misogyny and uncertaint y gave them a n incentiv e to do so, and their political priorities urged them to do so. Republican ideolog y equated absolut e kingship with absolute corruption . Republican thinkers were much less critical of family patriarchs, whose power was ostensibly limited b y law and softene d b y affection. A s such, thei r criti cism o f monarch y di d no t necessaril y appl y t o domesti c patriarchy . Libera l ideology widene d th e chas m betwee n politic s an d famil y lif e b y separatin g public an d paterna l power . I t mad e th e languag e o f liberty an d equalit y appropriate fo r th e public sphere but allowe d a traditional idio m o f natural hierarchy t o persis t i n th e domesti c sphere . The founder s too k advantag e o f these ideological openings to defy political tyranny and depoliticize men's authority in their families. Revolutionaries fought agains t monarchy, not famil y

The Culture of ManhoodI 2 7 patriarchy. Legislator s dispute d aristocrati c laws , not patriarcha l laws . Gover nors forfeite d roya l prerogativ e ove r men , bu t father s an d husband s main tained patriarcha l prerogativ e ove r women' s bodies , behavior , an d property . The resul t was tha t misogynist s remaine d fre e t o ven t patriarcha l rag e agains t women, an d ambivalen t male s were cue d t o resolv e uncertaintie s abou t man hood i n favo r o f the traditiona l patriarch , wh o retaine d th e coerciv e authorit y "to intimidate , no t t o accommodate " women. 5 7 Simultaneously, th e founders ' politica l prioritie s urge d the m t o kee p women of f th e publi c agenda . Mos t founder s feare d tha t disorderl y me n threatened t o destro y liberty by unleashing th e twi n evil s of mob anarch y an d demagogic tyranny . Accordingly , the y focuse d muc h o f thei r intellectua l an d political energy on encouragin g men t o defend libert y and show great restrain t when exercisin g it . The founder s woul d hav e ha d t o compromis e thei r focu s on mal e mobilizatio n an d quiescenc e t o debat e women' s right s o r dea l wit h prejudices regardin g publi c women . Politicizin g gende r certainl y woul d hav e meant deepenin g mal e discontents , whil e admittin g wome n t o politica l dis course woul d hav e invite d th e sexua l improprietie s an d politica l corruptio n often associate d wit h th e "publi c woman." 5 8 Th e founder s focuse d o n restor ing orde r amon g men ; the y relie d o n stil l powerfu l famil y patriarch s t o sub due disorderl y women . Historical possibilitie s fo r democratizin g famil y lif e di d no t translat e int o enhanced prospect s fo r politica l equality . Wome n wer e mostl y eliminate d from politica l discours e an d politics—bu t the y wer e no t forgotten . Som e founders sense d tha t women's exclusio n fortifie d fraterna l unit y among other wise disorderl y males . Carol e Patema n explain s tha t men' s monopol y o f citi zenship an d leadershi p provide d the m " a common interes t as men" i n sharin g power ove r women. Meanwhile , mos t founder s believe d tha t me n wer e mor e apt t o defen d libert y an d exercis e i t wit h self-restrain t whe n courting , be trothed, o r we d t o respectabl e women . Noa h Webste r calculate d tha t a man' s best defens e agains t " a dissipate d life " wa s a fondnes s fo r "ladie s o f charac ter." 59 I n sum , th e founder s appeale d t o men' s patriarchal interest s an d frater nal instinct s b y reaffirmin g thei r coerciv e powe r ove r women , reinforcin g women's exclusio n fro m politics , and recruitin g virtuous women t o encourag e men's goo d behavior . Second, th e founder s enliste d Christia n morality , republica n virtue , libera l self-interest, an d public education alon g with women's benign influenc e i n th e cause o f tamin g men' s passions , encouragin g mal e responsibility , ensurin g their orderl y conduct , an d promotin g mas s complianc e t o legitimat e author ity. They als o frame d innovativ e politica l institution s t o neutraliz e men' s pas -

28 I The Culture of Manhood

sions an d cushio n th e consequence s o f thei r disorderl y conduct . An d lik e most elites, the founders sought to establish hegemony and secure stability by soliciting men's consent and quiescence. Historically, Antonio Gramsc i observes , elites no t onl y "request " consen t but "educat e it. " They establis h hegemon y b y raising "th e grea t mas s of th e population t o a particular cultura l and moral level." They use cultural norm s to perfor m " a positive educativ e function " b y promotin g way s o f thinking , speaking, and acting conducive to mass compliance; and they operate coercive institutions to discharge "a negative educative function" b y penalizing subversive ideas, words, an d deeds . Hegemony i s "protected b y the armo r o f coercion." Elites' attempt to establish hegemony is not always a self-conscious, systematic effort t o make culture function a s an instrument o f mass subordina tion. Raymon d William s suggest s tha t hegemon y i s more o f " a lived, socia l process" in which elite s organize the various and shifting "meaning s and values" that saturate people's lives. Hegemony is never static because it is continually "renewed, recreated , defended , an d modified, " a s well as "resisted, lim ited, altered, challenged." 60 R. W. Connell adds that the struggle for hegemony often involve s the culture o f manhood . Mal e elite s promot e a "hegemoni c masculinity " tha t de ploys norms o f manhood t o justify dominan t authorit y an d encourag e mas s deference t o it . Elite s als o foste r "conservative " o r "complici t masculinities " that urge men to accept and benefit fro m dominan t mal e norms and institu tions; and they identify, stigmatize , an d punis h "subordinated " o r "margina l masculinities" that potentially undermine political stability. Unlike ideologies that appea l t o men's minds, hegemonic masculinity taps into th e deepest recesses of men's psychosexual, social, and political identities. Many scholars believe that one of men's strongest motives has involved male rivalry. Men have found i t exhilaratin g t o b e elevated abov e other men ; an d the y have felt de graded when treated "as a boy and not a man."61 By controlling the criteria for male elevatio n an d degradation , elite s who join hegemon y t o manhoo d sig nificantly strengthe n thei r ability to secure men's consent and quiescence. That i s wha t America n founder s did . The y promote d hegemoni c mas culinity a s par t o f thei r effor t t o restrai n disorderl y mal e passions , tempe r men's democratic desires, restore fraternal order , and reconstitute political authority. The y advance d a coheren t conceptio n an d languag e o f manhoo d based on the consensual norms that enjoined males to establish independence, start families, and govern dependents to achieve manhood and procreate new generations. The y stigmatized , sanctioned , an d reforme d disorderl y men , whose margina l masculinit y associate d the m wit h dependency , effeminacy ,

The Culture of Manhood I 2 9

immaturity, an d sterility . They rewarde d th e complici t masculinit y o f me n who conformed t o consensual norms by recognizing their social merit and citizenship. And the y promised immorta l fam e alon g with social status and political authority to extraordinary men who, like themselves, procreated a new nation an d glorious future fo r humankind . The founder s als o appropriate d aspect s o f America s conteste d ideal s o f manhood t o stabilize and fine-tune the male pecking order of the new republic. Fo r example , the y attacke d th e self-intereste d manhoo d o f male s wh o failed to settle into family life, but they generally applauded the self-intereste d manhood of married men who worked to protect and provision their families. Moreover, the y emphasized th e idea l of republican manhoo d whe n definin g citizenship but drew more heavily on images of aristocratic manhood and traditional patriarchy to legitimize the political authority and prerogative of national leaders. The founders rarel y debated the alternative ideals of manhood, but the y habitually relied on them t o educate the consent of the governed. Judith Sargen t Murray' s cal l fo r ever y American "t o play th e ma n fo r hi s country" conveyed two implicit but unmistakable messages. First, greater sexual equality may have been conceivable for the home, but men were to be the sole arbiters of the nation's political fate. Second, all men may have been born free and equal, but each male had to measure up to standards of manhood t o earn citizenshi p o r meri t leadershi p status . Murray' s languag e wa s no t un usual. Indeed, i t was a representative sampl e o f the "gramma r o f manhood " that th e founder s use d t o promot e hegemoni c norm s o f manhood , secur e men's consent, define citizenship , and legitimize political authority .

2 The Gramma r o f Manhood

The American founder s couple d th e concept o f manhood t o th e language of liberty. Benjamin Franklin proclaimed that his grandfathers essa y on libert y wa s written wit h "manl y freedom " an d Thoma s Pain e explaine d that Common Sense was meant to prepare the way for "manly principles of independence." John Adams praise d hi s Purita n ancestor s fo r thei r "manl y assertion of . . . rights" an d "manl y pertinaciou s spirit " agains t tyrann y whil e Thomas Jefferson applaude d his American brethren for demonstrating "manly firmness" an d "manly spirit" by renouncing British authority and declaring independent nationhood. 1 Manhoo d modifie d libert y an d thereb y injecte d a n element of masculine merit into the rhetoric of early American citizenship . One reason the founders joined manhood t o liberty was to motivate males to b e warriors i n th e struggl e agains t Grea t Britain . They delivere d th e message that men who trumpeted the glories of liberty and triumphed over its enemies merited the honor and respect due to manhood as well as the rights and responsibilities o f citizenship. Thomas Pain e and Abigail Adams sent a complementary message to men who opposed the patriot cause or did not join it. Paine wrot e tha t an y mal e wh o len t credenc e t o Tor y propagand a wa s "a n apostate from th e order of manhood." Adams declared that men who did "not fight and defend thei r own particular spot. . . deserve the slavery and subjec tion which awaits them." 2 The unmistakable implicatio n was that those men who faile d t o measure up t o martial manhoo d wer e unworthy o f liberty an d citizenship. A second reason the founders joined manhood and liberty was to promote an ethic of self-restraint. Patric k Henry applauded th e "manly fortitude" tha t encouraged me n t o sacrifice popularit y for mora l integrit y while James Otis, Jr., honored "manl y sentiments" that enjoine d me n t o sacrifice "health , ease, estate, or even life" for freedom. Paine gloried in the "manly and martial spirit" that discipline d soldier s an d Benjami n Franklin cheere d th e "manl y con stancy" tha t kep t me n cal m i n th e mids t o f hardship . Georg e Washingto n called for "manl y conduct" t o transfor m demobilize d soldier s int o self-disci -

30

The Grammar of Manhood I 3 1

plined citizens and others pleaded for "manly reflection" t o inhibit licentiousness, "manl y graces" to cur e conflict, "manl y confidence" t o bin d citizen s t o officials, an d "manl y reverence" to foster obedienc e to the U.S. Constitutio n and it s "manl y government." 3 Me n wh o engage d i n licentiou s conduc t an d democratic exces s deserve d t o b e marginalized , stigmatized , ostracized , an d even deprived of liberty, while those who exhibited manly self-restraint earne d the freedom t o practice responsible citizenship and promote the public good. The founder s promote d th e ide a tha t me n shoul d b e enthusiasti c i n th e cause of liberty but restrained in the exercise of liberty by elaborating a grammar of manhood. Their grammar dre w on hegemonic norms of manhood t o encourage disorderl y me n t o confor m t o a standard o f manly conduc t con ducive t o individua l self-restraint , goo d citizenship , an d publi c order . Their grammar o f manhood als o articulated consensua l criteri a for sortin g out th e ranks of men, restorin g order t o them, an d legitimizin g leadership authorit y in the new republic. The founders' mai n motivation fo r deployin g the grammar of manhood was to encourage men to discipline democratic desire; a crucial consequence of their use of it was to develop and disseminate ideas of citizenship and leadership that precluded women from politica l participation .

Manhood in Time George Washington sa w the American Revolution a s a test of whether Americans could "act like men and prove themselves worthy of the blessings of freedom." What di d i t mean t o ac t like men? The founder s dre w on consensua l norms embedded in the culture of manhood to emphasize male independence and famil y responsibilit y i n oppositio n t o femal e dependenc e an d slavery . They san g "Th e Libert y Song " i n prais e o f "worth y forefathers " wh o "be queathed us their liberty," and they committed themselves to protect and perpetuate libert y "fo r ou r children. " Whe n "eac h manl y breast " was "call' d t o bleed" i n defens e o f liberty , thos e wh o answere d th e cal l mad e themselve s "dear to every free-born mind " an d eligibl e for "deathles s fame," while thos e who exhibited fear or lethargy deserved to be "stripp'd of their freedom," "rob b'd of their right," and shamed by patriotic "Daughters of Liberty." To act like men, concludes Philip Greven, meant to inherit, defend, an d transmit the liberty that enable d citizen s t o b e "self-assertiv e an d self-wille d i n public, " no t dependent, effeminate, o r enslaved. 4 The founders elaborate d this hegemonic vision of manhood in an autobiographical story about procreative men giving bloody birth to a new people, land, fraternity, leadership , and nation .

32 I The Grammar of Manhood

The founders ' sag a was based o n th e ancien t assertio n tha t fertil e male s procreated children . Gerd a Lerne r recall s that th e Bibl e told o f man gener ating woman fro m hi s rib and planting the active seed of life "i n the passive receptacle o f woman's womb. " Ann a Jonasdotti r add s tha t Gree k philoso phers elevated th e status of the mal e seed by asserting that "ligh t an d beau tiful mal e seminal fluid" was the source of humanity's higher sensibilities and the conduit o f civilization fro m generatio n t o generation. Seventeenth-cen tury Englishme n idealize d mal e fecundity . Fo r example , satiris t Richar d Ames fough t th e battl e o f th e sexes in a fantasy abou t a homosocial Ede n where men coul d "procreat e like trees, and without women' s aid—promot e and propagat e ou r species. " Carol e Patema n observe s tha t Hobbe s an d Locke fough t th e battl e agains t divin e kingshi p i n fantasie s abou t state s o f nature that attributed to men the "generative power" to create "new physical life" as well as "new political societies." Whether suc h claims stemmed fro m male identificatio n wit h Go d th e Creator , unconsciou s fear s o f women' s power t o giv e birth, o r men's desire to avoi d dependenc e o n women, West ern thinker s hav e define d manhoo d a s much i n term s o f procreation a s of virtue or reason. 5 The American founder s reaffirme d myth s of male procreativity each tim e they invoked the state of nature to justify their claims to liberty. Reflecting the misogynist fantasie s o f Thomas Jefferson an d Joel Barlo w as well as Richard Ames, the y constructe d all-mal e state s o f natur e whic h assume d tha t me n could reproduc e th e specie s without women . Joh n Lelan d wa s unusua l be cause he was explicit. His state of nature began, "Suppose a man to remove to a desolat e islan d an d tak e a peaceable possessio n o f it. . . . In th e proces s of time from thi s man's loins ten sons are grown to manhood." Occasionall y the founders populate d nature with men, women, and children. Almost immediately, however , the y mad e th e wome n an d childre n perish . Her e i s Joh n Adams's disappearanc e act : "Whe n a number o f men, women, an d childre n are simply congregated together , ther e is no political authority among them . . . . T o leave women and children out of the question for the present, the men will all be free, equal, and independent of each other."6 Adams left women out of the question for the future to o because his main concern was to stabilize relationships among men. The emblem o f stable male relationships was the blood bond tha t joined procreative father s t o thei r son s an d grandsons . Georg e Washingto n ex plained tha t men ha d a divine duty to engage in th e "agreeabl e amusemen t of fulfilling th e first and great commandment, increas e and multiply." Me n especially hope d fo r son s wh o woul d transmi t thei r bloodlin e alon g wit h

The Grammar of Manhood I 3 3

their family name , estate, and social standing into the next generation. Bet ter yet, the y wanted grandson s t o perpetuat e thei r familie s fo r severa l gen erations. On e grandfathe r referre d t o hi s grandchildren a s "Our life , whil e we live!—Ou r hopes , whe n dead." 7 A famil y patriarc h coul d expec t t o achieve persona l dignity , socia l recognition , an d symboli c immortalit y b y siring respectful, resourcefu l heirs . He assumed a paternal obligation to protect, provision, educate , and provide patrimony for his sons and grandsons . In turn, his male offspring acquire d a filial obligation t o respect their fathe r and, eventually, to honor him by siring, protecting, provisioning, educating , and providin g patrimon y fo r yet anothe r generation . The ultimat e goa l o f procreative manhoo d wa s t o propagate , preserve , an d prolon g famil y dy nasties. Intergenerational bloo d bond s playe d a pivota l par t i n patrio t politics . Colonial leaders constructed heroic histories of Americas first "fathers " to encourage filial opposition to the British. Jonathan Mayhew applauded colonia l ancestors a s courageou s me n wh o refuse d t o b e victimize d b y old-worl d tyranny. They were hardy "adventurers" who uprooted their families, ventured their fortunes, an d riske d their lives by hazarding an Atlantic voyage, investing "their money, their toil , their blood" in the land, an d joining together i n agricultural platoons and military brigades to provision and protect their families against hostile forces. These accomplished ancestor s earne d "thei r right s or their dearly purchased privileges , call them which you will." Pamphleteer s such a s Thomas Fitc h calle d the m "th e purchase o f their ancestor s . . . [the ] reward o f the merit an d service s of their forefather s . . . the bes t inheritanc e they left t o their children." John Adams proclaimed, "Ou r fathers . . . earned and bought their liberty." 8 If "our fathers" fulfille d thei r par t o f the intergenerational bargai n b y purchasing liberty for their offspring, ho w did sons and grandsons who inherite d liberty as a birthright demonstrate their manly merit? Sheldon Wolin remind s us that a birthright may carry with it "an inherited obligation to use it, take care of it, pass it on, and hopefully improv e it." The founders argued that each generation had an obligation t o protect, nurture, and enhance ancestral liberty in order to transmit it to the next generation and the next. Indeed, only men who acted to defend an d exten d liberty truly deserved it. Accordingly, Mercy Oti s Warren tol d th e stor y o f th e Bosto n Te a Part y a s a parabl e o f patriot s wh o proved themselves worthy sons of liberty. Governor Thomas Hutchinson im periled ancestra l libert y whe n h e attempte d t o enforc e th e te a ta x b y usin g stealth and deception to "disarm his countrymen o f the manly resolution tha t was their principal forte. " Fortunately , Bostonian s demonstrate d manl y reso-

34 I The Grammar of Manhood lution b y thei r "extraordinar y exertions " i n defens e o f liberty. 9 Th e patriot s proved themselve s thei r fathers ' equals ; they inherite d bu t als o merited liberty . The founder s calle d on th e dictum tha t each male generation was obligate d to prov e its worth a s leverage for recruitin g colonist s t o th e caus e of liberty. I n 1768, Sila s Downer instructe d American s "manfull y t o oppos e ever y invasio n of our rights " so a s to preserv e an d deserv e thei r fathers ' legacy : Our father s fough t an d foun d freedo m i n th e wilderness; the y clothe d them selves in th e skins of wild beasts and lodge d unde r tree s among bushes; but i n that stat e they were happy because they were free. Shoul d thes e our nobl e an cestors arise from th e dead and find thei r posterity trucking away that liberty . . . , they would retur n t o the grave with a holy indignation agains t us . . . . We cannot, we will not, betray the trust reposed in us by our ancestors by giving up the least of our liberties. 10 The sam e year, Daniel Shut e contrasted "th e first renowned settlers " to a mod ern generatio n o f "degenerat e offspring " tha t wa s guilt y o f "prostitutio n o f patrimonial privileges " and "crimina l want o f philanthropy" becaus e its mem bers were loath to defend libert y "for million s yet unborn." I n 1773 , John Alle n asked colonist s t o recal l "th e righ t o f libert y whic h thei r forefather s bough t with thei r blood " a s motivation fo r thei r ow n struggles . Again i n 1775 , Moses Mather challenge d American s t o measur e u p t o thei r heroi c fathers , wh o earned libert y "a t thei r ow n ris k an d expens e an d b y thei r ow n swor d an d prowess." 11 Mos t founder s presume d tha t worth y me n woul d no t b e willin g to suffe r th e persona l sham e an d socia l disgrac e associate d wit h squanderin g their fathers ' legac y or forfeitin g thei r sons ' liberty . The Revolutio n amplifie d th e voic e o f heroi c father s commandin g thei r sons t o preserv e an d pas s o n liberty . Thoma s Jefferso n ushere d i n th e Revo lution b y declaring , "Honor , justice , an d humanit y forbi d u s t o surrende r that freedo m whic h we received fro m ou r gallan t ancestor s an d which ou r in nocent posterit y have a right t o receiv e from us. " Samuel Coope r encourage d American me n t o maintai n suppor t fo r th e Revolutio n b y memorializin g "our venerabl e fathers " a s me n marke d "b y al l th e manl y virtue s an d b y a n unquenchable lov e o f liberty, " an d als o a s me n wh o "cal l o n u s . . . t o per petuate th e hono r o f thei r liberty." 12 On e reaso n th e founder s develope d what Douglas s Adai r see s a s "a n almos t obsessiv e desir e fo r fame " wa s tha t they fel t pressure d t o measur e u p t o th e reputation s o f thei r pioneerin g an cestors. That the y did measur e u p wa s evident a few decade s later , when the y themselves wer e remembere d a s gallan t ancestors . Stanle y Griswold , fo r ex ample, attacke d factionalis m i n turn-of-the-centur y Connecticu t b y asking ,

The Grammar of Manhood I 3 5 "Where ar e our fathers ? Wher e ar e our forme r me n o f dignity, ou r Hunting tons, Shermans , Johnsons , an d Stile s wh o i n thei r da y appeare d lik e men , gave exaltation t o ou r character , an d neve r descende d t o a mean thing ? I t ap pears t o m e . . . w e ar e dwindled an d mor e dispose d t o ac t like childre n tha n men." Griswold' s injunctio n wa s "Le t th e spiri t o f our father s com e upo n us . Be men." 1 3 American male s wh o obeye d Griswold' s injunctio n t o "b e men " coul d ex pect a tripl e reward . First , the y robbe d mortalit y o f it s finality. Benjami n Franklin asked , "Wha t ol d bachelo r ca n di e withou t regre t o r remors e whe n he reflect s upo n hi s deat h be d tha t th e inestimabl e blessin g o f lif e an d bein g has been communicate d b y father an d so n throug h al l generations fro m Ada m down t o hi m bu t i n hi m i t stops and i s extinguished?" Men wh o me t thei r in tergenerational obligation s coul d liv e on throug h thei r son s an d i n th e mem ory o f thei r sons . Second , me n wh o defende d libert y fo r thei r familie s coul d expect t o b e praise d b y Sparta n wome n wh o urge d the m t o fight an d the n honored thei r heroism . Judit h Sargen t Murra y tol d th e stor y o f "Artemisia , wife o f Mausolus, " wh o "rendere d hersel f illustrious " b y buildin g th e Mau soleum t o hono r an d immortaliz e he r brav e husband . Third , me n wh o hon ored famil y obligation s an d defende d libert y merite d fraterna l trust . The y were repute d t o b e stabl e individual s wh o restraine d thei r passions , checke d their impulses , an d earne d thei r neighbors ' respec t an d cooperation . Con versely, me n outsid e intergenerationa l tim e wer e tempora l itinerant s wh o de served thei r neighbors ' distrust . That wa s Franklin's supposition , fo r example , when h e suggeste d tha t roya l governor s coul d no t b e truste d t o b e othe r tha n arbitrary because they ruled America without havin g American father s t o ven erate or American son s to protect. They com e an d g o but "leav e no famil y be hind them." 1 4 A fundamenta l rul e i n th e founders ' gramma r o f manhoo d wa s tha t wor thy me n situate d themselve s i n intergenerationa l time . The y respecte d thei r birthright o f libert y an d prove d themselve s worth y o f i t b y procreatin g an d nurturing son s an d b y defendin g an d extendin g libert y t o ne w generations . They thereb y achieve d persona l honor , socia l reputation , an d th e symboli c immortality associate d wit h endurin g famil y dynasties . I n contrast , me n wh o existed outside intergenerational tim e were not worthy o f their birthright ; no r were the y likel y t o b e truste d b y othe r men . Instead , the y wer e presume d t o be selfis h individual s wh o recognize d n o obligation s t o th e pas t o r future . They live d i n th e presen t wher e the y unleashe d lust , playe d ou t passion , an d indulged impuls e t o disgrac e thei r fathers ' memor y an d procreat e nothin g better tha n bastards .

36 I The Grammar of Manhood

Manhood and Space T h e nex t episod e i n th e founders' stor y of America concerne d fertil e me n giv ing birt h t o a new land . America n me n coul d procreat e childre n an d pas s o n liberty onl y i f the y cultivate d sufficien t lan d t o suppor t thei r offsprin g an d sustain thei r independence . Propert y was a precondition fo r familie s an d free dom. Benjami n Frankli n believe d tha t a n abundanc e o f lan d wa s America s greatest resource . Young men were not afrai d t o marry earl y or rais e large fam ilies becaus e the y coul d acquir e enoug h lan d t o provisio n thei r offsprin g an d be confident that , when thei r childre n were grown, ther e would b e "more lan d to b e ha d a t rate s equall y easy. " Thomas Jefferso n agreed . Tha t wa s wh y h e thought "th e immens e exten t o f uncultivate d an d fertil e lands " calle d Louisiana wa s crucia l t o America s future. 15 I n general , th e founder s equate d abundant land , earl y marriage , larg e families , rapi d populatio n growth , an d economic prosperit y wit h th e nationa l strengt h tha t guarantee d men' s libert y and security . What mad e th e founders ' stor y about me n an d lan d uniqu e was the exten t to whic h the y injecte d manhoo d int o rea l estate . John Lock e mad e a mixtur e of men' s labo r an d lan d th e sourc e o f propert y valu e an d ownership . Th e Americans, however , concocte d a mixture o f men's blood an d land . They por trayed America's "fathers " a s procreative pioneer s an d fertil e farmer s wh o im pregnated a virgin continen t wit h thei r bloo d t o giv e birth t o a new lan d an d prosperity. Frankli n asserte d tha t America' s Europea n settler s wer e me n wh o "purchased o r conquered th e territory at the expense of their ow n privat e trea sure an d blood. " Jefferso n describe d earl y settler s a s me n whos e "ow n bloo d was spil t i n acquirin g land s fo r thei r settlement. " A metaphori c measur e o f property value was the volume o f blood tha t Americans spille d t o acquire , de fend, an d bequeat h it . Georg e Duffiel d considere d th e continen t extremel y valuable becaus e "America' s choicest bloo d ha d flowed i n libera l streams" dur ing th e Revolutio n an d thu s America' s "soi l [was ] mad e fa t wit h th e bloo d o f her children." 16 "Fat soil " was mor e tha n a n economi c instrumentality . Th e founder s sa w fertile lan d a s a field fo r manhood . I t was th e landscap e fo r wha t Washingto n called "th e manl y employmen t o f agriculture. " W h a t wa s "manly " abou t it ? Agriculture teste d men' s physica l an d menta l abilitie s t o surviv e an d thriv e i n nature, endur e hardshi p an d adversity , recogniz e an d rea p th e reward s o f op portunity. I t was the economi c basi s of manly independence . Agriculture als o beckoned me n t o procreate prosperity to prolong their family dynasties. Thus, eastern me n ofte n trie d t o solv e th e proble m o f to o man y son s an d to o littl e

The Grammar of Manhood I 3 7 land b y speculating in western propert y to ensure future famil y access to farm land. Fo r John Taylor , agricultur e was th e vocation o f worthy me n wh o dare d to "subdu e sterility " and conver t " a wilderness int o a paradise" able to suppor t manly freedom an d family heirs. 17 Fathers and farmers alik e procreated th e fu ture. The founder s regularl y linked th e image of the republica n farme r t o manl y virtues suc h a s simplicity , benevolence , friendship , an d patriotism . Jefferso n went furthe r b y endowing men' s relationshi p t o th e land with religiou s mean ing: "Thos e wh o labo r i n th e eart h ar e th e chose n peopl e o f Go d . . . [in ] whose breast s h e ha s mad e hi s peculia r deposi t fo r substantia l an d genuin e virtue. I t i s the focu s i n which h e keep s aliv e tha t sacre d fire, whic h otherwis e might escap e from th e earth." H e complemente d hi s pastoral idyl l with a contrasting imag e o f American male s cas t ou t o f paradise . Hi s lis t o f falle n me n included unsettled , dependen t Americans suc h a s urban laborers , immigrants , itinerants, strangers , emancipate d slaves , an d nomadi c Indian s wh o survive d by hunting. Non e o f these me n practice d th e "agricultura l an d domesti c arts " that fostere d "improvemen t o f th e min d an d morals" ; non e investe d them selves i n a particula r piec e o f lan d o r a settle d community ; non e wer e stabl e men o f character . Rather , the y wer e amon g th e perpetua l migrant s tha t Joh n Taylor woul d blam e fo r havin g fled "thei r nata l spot " fo r ne w climates , onl y to fue l America s socia l an d politica l decay. 18 Most founder s believe d tha t a worthy ma n wa s someon e wh o occupie d a fixed plac e in continenta l space . Leaders suc h a s Washington, Adams, an d Jefferson broadcas t thi s belie f eac h tim e the y announce d thei r yearnin g t o exi t the publi c stag e an d retire , respectively , t o Moun t Vernon , Braintree , an d Monticello. Certainly , thes e declaration s wer e politicall y expedient . I t wa s wise for ambitiou s me n t o protest publi c servic e as a sacrifice o f their persona l desire fo r a simpl e agraria n life . Garr y Will s suggest s tha t Washington' s re peated plea s t o forg o hig h offic e fo r farmin g constitute d a major facto r i n hi s immense popularity . Still , mor e tha n politic s wa s involve d i n th e founders ' oft-expressed yearning s fo r a lif e o n th e land . The y agree d wit h contempo raries that a man's dignity and dynasti c aspirations require d him t o settle dow n in on e place—unde r hi s vine an d fig tree—t o enjo y hi s freedom , family , an d farm. 19 The linkag e betwee n manhoo d an d settle d spac e playe d a part i n th e con flict leadin g u p t o th e Revolution . Earl y on , America n colonist s complaine d that they were unjustly stigmatize d when th e British treate d the m a s itinerant s who had rippe d u p thei r European root s to wander th e New World. On e colo nial autho r aske d fello w American s t o compar e themselve s t o thei r Englis h

38 I The Grammar of Manhood

brethren: "Are you not of the same stock? Was the blood of your ancestors polluted by a change of soil? Were they freemen i n England and did they become slaves by a six-weeks voyage to America? Does not the sun shine as bright, our blood run a s warm? Is not ou r honor an d virtue as pure, our liberty as valuable, ou r propert y a s dear, ou r live s a s precious her e a s in England?" 20 Th e colonists denied their itinerancy and instead portrayed themselves as patriotic men who extende d th e British Empire , tamed a continent, an d fixed a place for themselves and their families in the New World. That made them worthy men who deserved the rights of Englishmen. The iron y o f th e Britis h stigma , accordin g t o Danie l Dulany , wa s tha t Americas mos t worthy men—those who successfully settle d a piece of land and fixed a place for thei r families i n the New World—were effectivel y pre cluded fro m citizenship . A citize n ha d t o vot e i n perso n i n Grea t Britain . Therefore, a n America n freeholde r coul d exercis e a citizen s suffrag e onl y "upon the supposition o f his ceasing to be an inhabitant o f America and becoming a resident o f Grea t Britain." 21 Th e resul t wa s tha t America s mos t notable men an d their offsprin g wer e refused th e manly dignity of political independence an d ful l citizenship . This refusa l encourage d man y of America s wealthiest an d most influential colonist s to express their sense of alienation b y joining and leadin g escalating colonial protest s agains t Britis h au thority. The founders ' concer n fo r th e relationshi p betwee n manhoo d an d spac e resurfaced a t the Constitutional Conventio n i n a debate over immigrant eli gibility for U.S. Senate seats. James Madison supporte d immigrant eligibilit y by arguing that meritoriou s me n who migrated t o America and settle d ther e "would feel the mortification o f being marked with suspicious incapacitations though the y should not covet the public honors." James Wilsons supportin g argument concluded , "T o be appointed t o a place may be a matter o f indifference. T o b e incapabl e o f bein g appointe d i s a circumstanc e gratin g an d mortifying." The founders presume d that men who settled a place for them selves in America deserved full citizenship ; and such men were justly aroused to anger when denied the right to vote or run for office, regardles s of whether they intended to exercise suffrage o r stand for election. Judith Shklar reminds us that civi c indignity i s important becaus e me n who fee l "dishonored " an d "scorned" can cause significant disorder. 22 Concerns abou t manhood , space , an d citizenshi p wer e tie d t o women' s economic contributions. The law of coverture granted husbands control over family property , whethe r o r no t wive s brough t tha t propert y int o th e mar riage. Without economic independence, married women were thought to lack

The Grammar of Manhood I 3 9

the unencumbered min d an d independen t wil l essential to citizenship. They were "civill y dead. " Nonetheless , wome n contribute d t o th e propert y an d wealth tha t supporte d men' s independence an d citizenship . Women worke d family space . They kep t garden s an d livestock , manufacture d item s fo r th e household an d marketplace , too k i n boarders , prepared an d preserve d food , assumed responsibility for childbearing and rearing, conducted welfare activ ities, and often transmitte d family property from generatio n to generation. In practice, Robert Gross suggests, husbands and wives "were partners in a common enterprise, although, in the end, only one was chairman of the board." 23 Alas, only the "chairman of the board" could achieve manhood and merit citizenship. The second rule in the founders' gramma r of manhood was that meritori ous men mixed their blood with the land to acquire and settle space for them selves and their families. Their ownershi p of property was a fixed foundation for maintainin g liberty and independence , governin g other family members , taming nature, and claiming citizenship. Worthy men migh t migrate—fro m Europe to America or from a father's farm to the wilderness—if their goal was to acquir e an d settl e ne w land. At times , th e durabilit y o f intergenerationa l dynasties depende d o n younge r son s claimin g an d clearin g ne w land . A s Michael Lienesc h put s it , "Movemen t throug h tim e would invariabl y b e influenced by movement acros s space. " Conversely , th e founder s doubte d th e merit o f men who faile d t o establis h a fixed place for themselves . They were "strangers" who wandered the land, suspects who threatened to disrupt decent society. Caleb Lownes, who administered Philadelphia' s prisons in the 1790s, announced tha t th e cit y streets were safe—except fo r th e crime s perpetrate d by "strangers . . . o n their way to the westward." 24

Manhood and Fraternity The founders tol d a tale about fathers and farmers who sought to transform a continent o f stranger s int o th e fraternit y know n a s civi l society. 25 They as sumed that the organic bonds joining American men to their sons and estates were sufficientl y stron g t o motivat e relative s an d neighbor s t o protec t thei r communities. That assumptio n wa s borne out b y the eigh t father-so n team s that manne d th e loca l militi a t o fight th e Britis h a t Lexington , an d b y th e complex kinship networ k of fathers an d sons, uncles and nephews , brothers, cousins, an d in-law s tha t mustere d a t Concord . Whe n America' s parochia l protests escalated int o a continental revolution , th e founders face d th e mor e

40 I The Grammar of Manhood formidable challeng e of forging unit y among American me n fro m divers e an d distant communities . H o w coul d thes e stranger s lear n t o trus t eac h other ? Would the y cooperat e i n war an d the n contribut e t o a harmonious peac e an d shared prosperity ? The founder s generall y characterize d me n a s socia l creatures . True , mos t men wer e selfish , bu t the y als o wante d t o b e respecte d b y othe r men . The y earned tha t respec t b y measurin g u p t o consensua l norm s o f manhood , mos t dramatically, b y defending an d extendin g manly liberty. Accordingly, colonia l leaders calle d o n American s t o enlis t i n th e struggl e agains t Grea t Britai n t o merit manhoo d an d ear n continenta l respect . Samue l Adam s challenge d Bostonians: "I f you ar e men, behav e like men." Mose s Mathe r rallie d opposi tion t o Britai n b y implorin g Americans "t o nobl y pla y the ma n fo r ou r coun try." Men wh o serve d with hono r deserve d publi c acclaim . Thus, Oxenbridg e Thatcher complimente d Virgini a legislator s fo r thei r resolution s agains t th e Stamp Ac t b y declaring , "Oh , yes . The y ar e men! " Samue l Sherwoo d con gratulated hi s courageou s countryme n b y praisin g "thi s manly , thi s heroic , and trul y patrioti c spiri t whic h i s graduall y kindlin g u p i n ever y freeman' s breast." B y 1775, more and mor e American me n were heeding the fraternal cal l to "figh t manfull y fo r thei r country." 26 The founders ' injunction s t o "behav e lik e men " an d "pla y th e man " an d "fight manfully " ha d contingen t meanings . Initially , suc h phrase s suggeste d that America n me n shoul d b e reluctan t t o tak e u p arm s agains t thei r Britis h brethren. Jame s Otis , Jr., advise d colonist s t o protes t th e Stam p Ac t bu t als o to recogniz e Parliament' s authorit y an d exhibi t "loyalty , patience , meekness , and forbearanc e unde r an y hardships," insofa r a s these trait s were "consisten t with th e characte r o f men." John Dickinso n counsele d Americans t o exercis e self-restraint i n thei r protest s an d t o remembe r tha t th e Britis h wer e stil l brethren "b y religion , liberty , laws , affections , relations , language , an d com merce." H e als o warne d patriot s t o aver t th e blood y consequence s o f separa tion: "Tor n fro m th e bod y t o which w e are u n i t e d , . .. w e must blee d a t ever y vein." Worth y me n restraine d martia l ardo r t o balanc e claim s o f libert y against establishe d loyalties . Thoma s Jefferso n exemplifie d thi s discipline d ardor i n 177 4 when h e expresse d outrag e a t Britis h tyrann y bu t continue d t o plead wit h th e kin g t o reaffir m "fraterna l lov e an d harmony" 2 7 With th e onse t o f armed hostilitie s i n th e mid-i770s , patrio t leader s bega n to urg e me n t o wa r agains t thei r treacherou s Britis h brethren . Georg e Wash ington condemne d th e Britis h fo r subvertin g "th e law s an d constitutio n o f Great Britai n itself , i n th e establishmen t o f which som e o f th e bes t bloo d o f the kingdo m ha s bee n spilt. " Joh n Witherspoo n expresse d disgus t tha t me n

The Grammar of Manhood I 4 1

who wer e "th e sam e i n blood , i n language , an d i n religio n shoul d notwith standing butcher one another with unrelenting rage." Joseph Warren saw separation as a forgone conclusio n an d issued a call to arms: "Our al l is at stake. . . . An hour lost may deluge your country in blood and entail perpetual slavery upon th e fe w of your posterit y who surviv e the carnage. " Thomas Pain e announced tha t th e tim e fo r tal k was done . Hi s messag e t o th e pitifu l me n who pined for peace rather than arming for war was, "You are unworthy of the name of husband, father, friend, an d lover and . .. you have the heart of a coward and the spirit of a sycophant." 28 The founders use d consensual norms of manhood t o judge mens conduc t during th e war . Fo r example , the y argue d tha t Britis h peac e overture s tha t promised t o restore fraternal harmon y a t the price of American men s libert y were deceitful seduction s that meritorious men must reject. Paine called Lord Howe's proposals "cruel and unmanly." Abigail Adams suggested that Americans who favored peac e without independenc e had "neithe r the spirit nor th e feeling o f men." Meanwhile, Jefferson attacke d th e British for destroyin g th e trans-Atlantic bonds of brotherhood b y committing fratricide an d then com pounding their treachery by using "Scotch and foreign mercenarie s to invade and deluge us in blood." Washington ofte n mentione d Britain' s use of mercenaries. He refused severa l proposals to talk peace with th e explanation, " I am satisfied tha t n o [peace ] commissioner s wer e eve r designe d excep t Hessian s and other foreigners." The proper respons e to Britain's unmanly conduct, h e argued, was for Americans to engage in a "vigorous and manly exertion" consistent with "our character as men."29 Overall, the founders prided themselves on havin g vindicate d thei r characte r a s me n i n dealin g wit h Grea t Britain . They sought liberty but respecte d Britis h authority. Their fraterna l loyalt y to Britain faltere d onl y when fratricid e an d mercenar y activit y made unit y im possible. Finally, they declared independence, raised a respectable army to defend liberty , and refused peac e without honor . When the founders declare d independence, they initiated a process of procreating a distinctive American fraternity . Wa r catalyzed th e process. Wilson Carey McWilliams suggest s that me n ar e usually encouraged durin g a struggle against a common enem y to set aside small differences an d "fin d solidar ity" with one another. That was David Ramsay's explanation for early national unity: "A sense of common danger extinguished selfish passions [and ] local attachments were sacrificed o n th e alta r o f patriotism." Bu t fraternitie s forge d in battle are fragile. They depend on the presence of a common enemy or danger rathe r tha n o n share d value s an d visions . Jefferson mad e a similar poin t during the Revolution. He predicted that from th e conclusion of the war on-

42 I The Grammar of Manhood ward, American me n wer e likely to forge t th e struggl e fo r libert y and equalit y and "forge t themselve s bu t i n th e sol e facult y o f makin g money." 30 Th e founders' fea r tha t wartime fraternit y woul d falte r len t urgenc y to their effort s to fortif y America n unity . The exigencie s o f revolutio n an d nationhoo d burs t ope n th e issu e o f membership i n America n society . What qualifie d a man t o fit in ? Ho w earl y did h e hav e t o joi n th e patrio t cause ? Di d h e hav e t o serv e fo r th e duration ? Could loyalist s who switche d side s be trusted? Were neutrals, the ambivalent , opportunists, an d pacifist s eligible ? Shoul d Catholic s b e admitte d i f priest s and papist s use d thei r "influenc e i n th e next world" t o tur n "th e superstitiou s multitude" agains t th e Revolution ? W h a t abou t clergyme n an d layme n wh o were deeme d slave s t o superstitio n an d avarice ? Wer e the y s o differen t fro m those spiritua l soul s wh o participate d i n "a n intercours e o f humane , gener ous kindnes s an d gratefu l attachmen t an d fidelity whic h lik e th e vita l fluid diffuses cheerfu l healt h throug h th e whol e politica l body"? 31 Di d ethnicit y affect membership ? Jame s Winthro p fel t tha t ethni c homogeneit y i n Ne w England "preserve d thei r religio n an d moral s [and ] tha t manl y virtu e whic h is equall y fitted fo r renderin g the m respectabl e i n wa r an d industriou s i n peace," but mixe d bloo d i n Pennsylvani a cos t that stat e its "religion an d goo d morals." Question s als o aros e abou t America s backwoodsmen . Wer e the y Americans o r " a mongrel half-breed , hal f civilized, hal f savage?" And ho w di d race factor in ? "A Constant Customer " wa s surprised "tha t a people who pro fess t o b e s o fon d o f freedo m . . . can se e suc h number s o f thei r fello w men , made o f th e sam e blood , no t onl y i n bondag e bu t kep t s o eve n b y them. " However, a South Carolinia n denie d tha t whites an d black s were "of the sam e blood." H e equate d emancipatio n t o miscegenatio n an d proclaimed , "Le t every spark of honest prid e concur t o sav e us from th e infamy o f such a mon grel coalition." 32 The issu e o f fraterna l bloo d bond s resurface d i n th e debat e ove r th e Con stitution. James Madison invoke d "th e kindred bloo d which flows i n the veins of American citizens " and "th e mingled bloo d whic h the y have shed" t o buil d continental suppor t fo r a nationa l government . I n contrast , "Cato " stresse d the local scope of men's bonds, arguing that America was made of families an d fraternities loosel y knit togethe r "t o provide fo r th e safety o f [their ] posterity. " He argue d tha t th e Constitutio n promote d a n artificia l unit y tha t woul d se e Americans "travelin g throug h sea s of blood." Competin g image s o f fraternit y and fratricid e resurface d i n th e 1790s . Madison propose d th e Bil l of Rights t o invite antifederalist s int o th e nationa l fraternity ; bu t Pere s Fobe s warned tha t excessive libert y incite d me n t o practic e th e licentiousnes s an d factionalis m

The Grammar of Manhood I 4 3

that "creat e jealousies , infus e suspicions , weake n publi c confidence , kindl e and augmen t th e flames of suc h contentio n a s ma y desolat e a countr y an d crimson i t wit h blood." 33 Transformin g a lan d o f stranger s int o a ban d o f blood brothers proved a daunting challenge. Several factors fostere d fraterna l unit y despite disagreement an d diversity . The founders mostl y agreed on what i t meant t o be a worthy man i n searc h of fraternity . Suc h a man discipline d hi s passions , impulses , an d avaric e t o win othe r men' s respect and establis h fraterna l membership . H e continuall y earned hi s membership b y exhibiting manly virtues such a s the courage, in tegrity, an d civilit y tha t attracte d othe r men' s trus t an d friendship . H e als o recognized manl y meri t an d deferre d t o meritoriou s leaders . Noah Webste r suggested tha t th e only alternative t o men' s self-discipline, fraterna l solidar ity, an d deferenc e t o manl y leader s wa s th e chao s an d violenc e o f Jacobi n France. The founders also agreed that the search for national unity was a male endeavor. Men as men shared responsibility for defendin g liberty , provision ing and protecting families, fitting int o fraternal society , and shaping publi c life. Women coul d encourag e me n t o fit into fraterna l societ y and compen sate fo r men' s failur e t o d o so , bu t the y coul d no t transcen d thei r politica l marginality. Jefferson's attitud e was typical. He applauded American women for having "the good sense to value domestic happiness" rather than to "wrinkle their foreheads with politics," and he condemned Parisia n "Amazons" for hunting socia l pleasure s an d fomentin g politica l riot s rathe r tha n mindin g their nurseries. 34 The thir d rul e i n th e founders ' gramma r o f manhoo d wa s tha t worth y men wer e socia l creature s who sough t t o fit int o fraterna l society . They re spected establishe d loyaltie s an d disregarde d mino r disputes . Whe n neces sary, however , the y create d ne w fraternitie s o f self-disciplined , meritoriou s men. I n tim e of war, they invited stranger s t o demonstrat e manl y worth b y joining the fraternity o f battle against enemie s who threatene d thei r liberty , property, and posterity. In peacetime, they sought t o sustain fraternal bond s and guard them against the corrosive acids of individualism an d avarice. Unworthy men came in three varieties: men alleged to have different blood ; selfish egotists and social isolates whose only loyalty was to themselves; and misguided mobs , fratricidal factions , an d demagogue s who menaced th e publi c good. Most founders thought that America's social stability depended on persuading th e bul k o f American me n t o provid e fraterna l suppor t fo r worth y leaders who, in turn, would tam e the disorderly passions and counteract th e democratic distemper o f aliens, egotists, isolates, mobs, factions, an d dema gogues.

44 I The Grammar of Manhood

Manhood and Leadership Could America n me n procreat e a national fraternit y withou t fosterin g fratri cide? The founder s agree d tha t American me n wer e disorderly creatures pron e to blood y violence; bu t the y dispute d th e implication s o f men' s penchan t fo r bloodshed. Jefferso n foun d redeemin g valu e i n th e blood y violence o f Shays' s Rebellion. H e wrot e Ezr a Stiles , "Wha t countr y ca n preserv e it s liberties i f its rulers are not warned fro m tim e t o tim e tha t thi s people persevere in th e spiri t of resistance?... W h at signif y a few lives lost in a century o r two? " But Wash ington considere d Shays' s Rebellio n unmitigate d evil . H e exclaimed , "What , gracious God , i s man ! tha t ther e shoul d b e suc h inconsistenc y an d perfidi ousness i n hi s conduct? I t i s but th e othe r da y that we were shedding bloo d t o obtain th e constitution s unde r whic h w e no w liv e . . . an d no w w e ar e un sheathing th e swor d t o overtur n them." 3 5 Thes e contrastin g view s wer e no t wholly contradictory . Th e founders ' gramma r use d "blood " bot h a s a metaphoric testin g groun d fo r manhoo d i n searc h o f fraternity an d a s a sym bol o f disorderly manhoo d i n nee d o f fraterna l leadership . Jefferson returne d t o th e relationshi p betwee n th e struggl e fo r libert y an d lost lives in 1793, when reflectin g o n a bloody turn o f events in the French Rev olution: In the struggle which was necessary, many guilty persons fell without the form s of trial, and with them some innocent. These I deplore as much as anybody. . . . But I deplore them as I should have done had they fallen i n battle. It was necessary t o us e th e ar m o f th e people , a machin e no t quit e s o blin d a s balls an d bombs, but blind to a certain degree. A few of their cordial friends me t at their hands th e fat e o f enemies . Bu t tim e an d trut h wil l rescu e an d embal m thei r memories, while their posterity will be enjoying th e very liberty for which the y would never have hesitated to offer u p their lives. The liberty of the whole earth was depending on th e issue of the contest, an d was ever such a prize won with so little innocent blood? 36 Jefferson too k th e lon g view . H e sa w revolutionar y abuse s a s deplorabl e bu t necessary fo r achievin g lastin g liberty , implyin g tha t me n mus t endur e self sacrifice an d bloodshe d i n fraterna l solidarit y wit h futur e generations . Jeffer son's perspectiv e highlight s tw o majo r motif s i n th e founders ' birthin g stor y of America . First, th e founders conceive d o f blood a s a medium fo r testin g men's mem bership i n society . A ma n ha d t o invest , risk , give , an d tak e bloo d t o procre ate an d participat e i n fraterna l society . Crevecoeur' s America n Farme r state d that immigrant s wh o investe d thei r bloo d i n America n soi l receive d th e titl e

The Grammar of Manhood I 4 5

of freemen an d th e opportunit y t o "provid e fo r thei r progen y . . . the mos t holy, the most powerful, th e most earnes t wish he can possibly form, a s well as the most consolator y prospect when h e dies." The payof f was "a new race of men , whos e labor s an d posterit y wil l on e da y caus e grea t change s i n th e world." Washington moved from Crevecoeur s fraternity o f farmers to his own fraternity o f soldiers. Followin g th e winte r o f want a t Valley Forge , he pai d homage t o farmer s a s men whos e labors guarantee d tha t soldiers ' starvatio n and suffering would soon end. Meanwhile, "American soldiers will despise repining at such triflin g stroke s of adversity, trifling indee d when compare d t o the transcendent prize which will undoubtedly crown their patience and perseverance, glory and freedom , peac e and plent y t o themselve s an d th e com munity . .. th e admiration of the world, the love of their country, and the gratitude o f posterity." Bloodshe d an d starvatio n wer e minor matter s t o worth y men who willingly paid the price for "bein g immortalized" a s benefactors o f posterity.37 Second, the founders suggeste d tha t historical necessit y challenged Americans to transcend mundan e manhoo d an d engag e in self-sacrifice t o achieve fame. Madiso n invoke d historica l necessit y t o dismis s antifederalis t claim s that th e Constitutiona l Conventio n abuse d it s authority : "Whic h wa s th e more important, which the less important? Which the end, which the means? Let the most scrupulous expositors of delegated powers, let the most inveter ate objectors against those exercised by the convention answer these questions. Let them declar e whether i t was of most importanc e t o the happiness o f the people of America tha t th e Articles o f Confederation shoul d b e disregarded , and a n adequat e governmen t b e provided ; o r tha t a n adequat e governmen t should b e omitted, an d th e Articles of Confederation preserved. " Alexander Hamilton added that necessity sometimes demanded that a representative oppose th e will o f th e peopl e t o achiev e th e publi c good : "Instance s migh t b e cited in which conduct o f this kind has saved the people from ver y fatal con sequences of their own mistakes and has procured lasting monuments of their gratitude t o th e me n wh o ha d courag e an d magnanimit y enoug h t o serv e them at the period of their displeasure."38 Necessity, expediency, exigency, and fortune wer e opportunitie s fo r grea t me n t o asser t a manl y prerogative , re gardless of law or adverse public opinion, i n the expectation that , eventually , they would be vindicated b y the timeless fraternity calle d posterity. Many founder s believe d tha t mos t American me n ha d th e potentia l t o b e farmers and fighters who invested, risked, and shed blood to secure liberty and earn membership i n society. It was this potential tha t Jefferson honore d i n his remarks o n Shay s s Rebellio n an d th e Frenc h Revolution . However , mos t

46 I The Grammar of Manhood

founders feare d that the male majority was not qualified t o recognize necessity, address it, or meet its challenges. Consider George Washington's reaction to the 1783 "Newburgh Addresses," by which his officers threatened a military takeover if they did not receive their due compensation. Washington warned the officer s not t o assert a dangerous prerogative that would "ope n th e flood gates to civil discord and deluge our rising empire in blood." 39 I f the "gentlemen" of Washington's office r corp s coul d participat e i n a n anarchi c plot , i t was even mor e likely that common citizens and soldiers could be seduced by demagogues into factional bloodshed. Washington's sharp reaction to Shays's Rebellion expressed his fear that disorderly men might destroy American liberty and fraternity . John Adams hoped that most men were "too economical of their blood" to join mobs or follow demagogues; he hoped that most men would become habituated t o deferrin g t o th e "bette r sort " o f men. However , recognizin g th e better sort and distinguishin g worthy leaders was a controversial matter . Approaching the presidential election of 1800, for example, Alexander Hamilto n condemned candidate Jefferson a s a dangerous demagogue. Hamilton argue d that th e possibility of "an atheist i n religio n an d a fanatic i n politics" assuming "the helm of the state" constituted a crisis that made it necessary for leaders not t o be "overscrupulous" about " a strict adherence to ordinary rules" to prevent Jefferson' s election . H e implie d tha t a fe w exceptiona l me n wer e needed to wield nation-saving prerogative. Jefferson wo n the election only to demonstrate that he, too, was not overscrupulous about adhering to ordinary rules. When h e was president, Gar y Schmit t observes , Jefferson advance d a "doctrine o f extra-constitutiona l executiv e prerogative " i n th e nam e o f do mestic order and national security. 40 Why would ordinar y American me n wh o were skeptical o f authority be come loyal followers o f powerful nationa l leaders ? One reaso n was that me n and leader s were bound togethe r b y the living memory o f the revolutionar y fraternity o f battle . Annual Fourt h o f July sermon s an d oration s reminde d men o f thei r nobl e struggle , an d fraterna l group s suc h a s th e Societ y o f Cincinnati and the Freemasons provided settings for veterans to sustain thei r military ties . Another reaso n was that me n an d leader s were united b y consensual norm s o f manhood. The y agree d tha t me n ough t t o striv e fo r inde pendence, head families, and fit into fraternal society . Moreover, they believed that individuals who excelled at manly virtues, such as self-sacrifice i n the service o f independenc e an d th e publi c good , deserve d t o b e recognized , ad mired, an d elevate d t o nationa l leadershi p status . Tha t wa s wh y Willia m Emerson praised Washington as "a man among men" as well as "a hero among heroes [and ] a statesman among statesmen." 41

The Grammar of Manhood I 4 7

Still, the founders fel t that unity between men and leaders was always fragile. Individuals risked their manly independence whenever they conformed t o group norms or deferred to authority. The founders trie d to minimize the risk by portraying leaders as manly men, citizens' choice, hesitant public servants, and benig n governors . Hopefully , mos t me n woul d trus t officeholder s wh o exhibited manl y meri t an d acte d th e par t o f affectionate fathe r figures. Another problem was that women potentially subverted men's attachment to fraternal societ y an d leadership . Wive s migh t kee p husband s fro m militi a musters that were excuses for drinking and gambling. Or women migh t urge men t o sta y at home t o suppor t an d protec t the m rathe r tha n d o thei r civi c duty as soldiers by marching off to war. One reason the founders fel t justifie d in perpetuating patriarchal power was to defeat women's efforts t o resolve conflicts between domesticity and fraternity i n favor of parochial family interest s regardless of the public good. 42 A fourth rul e in the founders' gramma r of manhood was that worthy men fit into a civic fraternity le d by meritorious men. Worthy men were independent farmers an d citizen soldiers who suffered pain , risked blood, and under went self-sacrific e t o ear n membershi p i n fraterna l society . The y wer e als o modest me n wh o recognize d th e nee d fo r leadershi p t o addres s th e crise s of modernity, deferred t o manly leaders, and sometimes consented to leadership prerogative i n th e service of posterity. Unworth y me n wer e selfish me n wh o demanded th e liberty to indulge their passions, viewed others as instruments to fulfil l thei r persona l goals , an d supporte d demagogue s wh o pandere d t o public opinion , fostere d factionalism , an d sough t powe r t o d o infamou s deeds. Lik e me n isolate d i n intergenerationa l tim e an d continenta l space , those outsid e th e flow of fraternal societ y and leadershi p threatene d rui n t o the republic of men.

Manhood and the Republic The final chapte r i n th e founders ' autobiographica l stor y wa s th e on e tha t Abraham Lincoln resurrected in his Gettysburg Address. That was the episode in which our fathers "brough t forth, " "conceived, " and "consecrated " a "new nation." The founders saw themselves as more than virtuous men restoring republican right s o r rationa l me n negotiatin g a social contract ; the y als o por trayed themselves as fertile men who procreated an organic republic. One prerevolutionary expressio n o f thei r belie f i n politica l animatio n wa s Joh n Tucker's 1771 portrait of an ideal American polity :

48 I The Grammar of Manhood The political state would be like a body in full health . The constitutional laws, preserved inviolate, would like strong bones and sinews support and steady the regular frame . Suprem e an d subordinat e ruler s dul y performin g thei r prope r functions woul d b e like the greater and lesser arteries, keeping up thei r prope r tone and vibrations; and justice, fidelity, and every social virtue would, like the vital fluid, run without obstructio n an d reach, refresh, an d invigorate the most minute and distant parts. While the multitude of subjects, yielding in their various place s an d relation s a ready an d cheerfu l obedienc e would , lik e th e nu merous yet connected veins, convey back again the recurrent blood to the great fountain o f it and th e whole frame b e vigorous, easy, and happy. 43 The founder s depicte d themselve s a s life-givers who , b y 1776, had committe d themselves t o givin g birt h t o a new republic . However , th e creatio n o f politi cal life presume d th e possibilit y o f political death . America n dream s o f polit ical fatherhoo d wer e premise d o n Britain' s politica l degeneration , an d th e founders kne w tha t thei r republi c wa s vulnerabl e t o th e sam e fate . Thoug h some founder s imagine d linea r progress , mos t agreed , "I t i s with state s a s it i s with men , the y hav e thei r infancy , thei r manhood , an d thei r decline." 44 Many founders spok e as if they were giving birth t o a living, breathing, pul sating republic. Durin g what Samue l Mille r commemorate d a s "our country' s natal hour, " John Adam s anticipate d parturitio n i n June 177 6 by announcin g that th e "throes " o f Congres s soo n "wil l ushe r i n th e birt h o f a fine boy. " Mercy Oti s Warren sa w a bright futur e fo r "a n infan t natio n a t onc e arise n t o the vigor o f manhood," bu t other s feare d fo r th e Republic' s health . I n 1782 , a Bostonian worried , "Ho w humiliatin g would i t be to hav e our independence , just brough t t o birth , fai l fo r wan t o f strengt h t o b e delivered. " A yea r later , Washington likene d th e state s t o "youn g heir s com e a little prematurel y per haps t o a large inheritance. " Bu t Warre n remaine d optimistic . Sh e was joyfu l that th e "youn g republi c . . . had rapidl y passe d throug h th e grade s o f yout h and pubert y an d wa s fas t arrivin g t o th e ag e o f maturity. " B y 1788 , "A n Ol d State Soldier " wa s arguin g tha t th e bes t wa y t o ensur e th e continuin g healt h and developmen t o f "tha t tende r infant , Independence " wa s to suppor t ratifi cation o f the U.S . Constitution. 4 5 The imager y o f a n infan t natio n seekin g th e maturit y o f manhoo d per vaded th e ratificatio n debates . Jeremiah Hil l likene d th e "glor y o f thi s youn g empire" guide d b y a ne w Constitutio n t o a "fair , healthy , promisin g bo y ris ing t o maturity. " Simeo n Baldwi n summe d u p federalis t optimis m b y recall ing th e "effusion s o f geniu s [that ] distinguishe d th e infanc y o f thi s nation. " He awaite d wit h deligh t "wha t w e ma y expec t whe n sh e [sic] shal l ripe n int o manhood!" Merc y Oti s Warren , fo r he r part , turne d federalis t imager y o n it s

The Grammar of Manhood I 4 9 head when contrastin g th e "manl y exertions" of revolutionary patriot s an d th e "manly feelings " o f antifederalists t o th e childis h federalist s wh o resemble d " a restless, vigorous youth, prematurely emancipated fro m th e authority of a parent, bu t withou t th e experienc e necessar y t o direc t hi m wit h dignit y an d dis cretion." 46 Movement towar d nationa l manhoo d wa s debate d fo r anothe r decade . I n 1790s, Judith Sargen t Murra y observe d "th e buddin g life " o f a n "infan t con stitution" invigorate d b y "luminous ray s of manly hope," but warned tha t fac tionalism wa s "murderin g i n th e cradl e so promising a n offspring " an d bring ing fort h i n it s plac e "hell-bor n anarchy. " Bisho p James Madiso n praise d th e United State s fo r it s "progres s fro m infanc y t o manhood " bu t Pere s Fobe s re called, "W e sa w a natio n bor n i n a da y [and ] fel t th e pang s an d pleasure s o f the parturitio n o f a ne w empire " onl y t o hav e i t infecte d b y mal e licentious ness. Jonathan Maxe y added tha t Americas democrati c politics had becom e " a capricious offspring o f a moment, perpetuall y exposed t o destruction fro m th e varying whim o f popular frenz y o r th e darin g stride s o f licentious ambition. " In th e early nineteenth century , Noa h Webste r compare d th e unstable ne w republic t o youn g me n wh o hav e "mor e courag e tha n foresigh t an d mor e en thusiasm tha n correc t judgment. " Fishe r Ame s complaine d tha t th e U.S . Constitution wa s conceive d "wit h al l the bloo m o f youth an d splendo r o f in nocence . . . gifted wit h immortality, " onl y t o fal l pre y to "licentiousness , tha t inbred malad y o f democracie s tha t deform s thei r infanc y wit h gra y hairs an d decrepitude." 47 Many founder s sa w themselve s a s participant s i n wha t Hanna h Arend t calls "natality, " th e actio n o f foundin g an d sustainin g politica l bodie s i n an ticipation o f a n influ x o f ne w generations . Thei r self-portrait s depicte d me n of exceptional meri t wh o procreate d a new nation , protecte d it s infanc y fro m democratic excess , nurture d i t t o matur e manhood , shielde d i t fro m death , and, bywa y o f exemplary thinking , innovativ e constitutions , an d a federal re public, improve d th e future fo r al l posterity. To borrow Nanc y Hartsock' s lan guage, the y regarde d themselve s a s "pregnan t i n soul. " They certainl y ranke d themselves amon g history's great nation builder s an d fel t the y deserved th e respect show n b y men wh o calle d the m "father s o f their country. " I n effect , th e founders expropriate d th e ide a o f natalit y fro m women . The y di d no t giv e much weigh t t o femal e reproductiv e powers . Judit h Sargen t Murra y under stood tha t women' s publi c standin g woul d no t resul t fro m thei r biologica l powers bu t instea d investe d hop e i n thei r cultura l productivity . Wome n needed t o emulat e "manl y fires" o f wisdom, develo p th e "fertil e brai n o f th e female," an d exhibi t thei r "creativ e faculty" t o achiev e a public presence. Nev -

50 I The Grammar of Manhood

ertheless, the founders di d not include creative women in politics as founding mothers, republica n citizens , o r nationa l leaders . Often , the y eve n faile d t o consider women as noteworthy subjects or significant spectators. 48 The final rule in the founders' gramma r of manhood was that exceptiona l or heroi c me n contribute d t o th e birt h an d nurturanc e o f a republic. The y were the fathers of the country and the future. They invested their fame in the fate of the public and posterity, rather than solely in their own families and estates. Unworthy me n were sterile men o r destructive men. They felt n o con nection betwee n themselve s an d futur e generations ; the y wer e innocen t o f dreams o f distinction ; o r the y wer e licentiou s me n wh o imperile d nationa l birth, retarde d politica l maturation , an d endangere d th e newbor n republic . The mos t worthy men sough t a fame born e of procreating a glorious future , whereas the most unworthy males acquired infamy by sapping other men s political potency.

Order in the Ranks of Men The Bosto n colonist s wh o resiste d roya l authorit y se t a lastin g preceden t when the y "chos e to hazard th e consequences o f returning bac k to th e stat e of natur e rathe r tha n quietl y submi t t o unjus t an d arbitrar y measures." 49 Henceforth, mos t founder s feared , America n me n exhibite d a propensity t o claim unlimite d right s an d hazar d disorderl y conduc t wheneve r the y op posed publi c measures , eve n thos e enacte d an d administere d b y thei r ow n representatives. The founders develope d and deployed the grammar of manhood t o encourag e American male s t o engag e i n self-sacrific e i n defens e o f liberty an d t o exhibi t self-restrain t i n th e exercis e of liberty, t o suppor t an d consent t o deservin g leadership, an d thereb y t o promot e orde r i n th e rank s of men. The founders ' gramma r o f manhood consiste d o f hegemonic norm s an d rules meant to move the hearts of men. Its main message was that a male worthy of self-esteem, socia l respect, an d civi c dignity achieved manl y indepen dence, family status, and governance of women by fulfilling intergenerationa l obligations, fixing a settled place for himself and his heirs, fitting into frater nal society, recognizing and deferring to worthy leaders, and helping to fathe r a new nation. This messag e was steeped i n blood. Manhoo d wa s a matter o f blood bond s betwee n father s an d sons , the investment o f blood i n lan d an d liberty, th e kindre d bloo d tha t define d fraterna l society , th e innocen t bloo d that linked ancestral sacrifice to future happiness, the risking and shedding of

The Grammar of Manhood I 5 1

blood that tested citizens and leaders, the bloody birth of the body politic, and the factional bloodlettin g that imperiled the Republics survival. 50 The grammar of manhood offered littl e direct guidance regarding male-female relations. However , th e founder s assume d tha t wome n motivate d me n to risk their blood and defend liberty, bore their children, contributed to family provision and comfort, and supported men's fraternal relation s and nationbuilding ambitions. Ongoing patriarchal dominatio n ensure d women's assistance i n American me n s procreative missio n t o shap e th e cours e o f history. The founder s sa w themselves a s autonomous historica l agents , the fathers o f a new people, land, society, and republic destined to change the world for th e better. They inflate d th e value o f their natality , i n part , b y devaluing femal e sexuality. They instituted a new republic in which th e prior identificatio n o f women with bloody childbirth and menstruation would gradually give way to the Victorian era's bloodless images of female passionlessness and political innocence.51 The founder s communicate d challengin g standards—an d the y were con vinced tha t man y male s di d no t measur e u p t o everyda y expectations abou t manly courag e an d self-restraint . Coward s an d libertine s betraye d ancestor s and offspring, transforme d libert y to license, engaged in deceitful an d criminal conduct, an d fueled th e factionalism tha t mobilized mobs and leveled republics. Worse, th e exampl e o f a fe w licentiou s me n threatene d t o awake n within America's more sober family men dormant passions, impulses, and interests that threatened to destroy social harmony and political legitimacy. The founders generall y believed that onl y the most mindless democrat would ad vocate the rights of man an d citizen for disorderl y males who acted like children. They di d no t deserv e th e right s o f men. No r coul d the y be trusted t o participate i n politics . Lik e women , the y neede d t o b e governe d t o ensur e public order.

3 The Bachelo r and Othe r Disorderly Men

The founders use d the stock figure of the Bachelor to identify th e lowest rung of manhood. The Bachelor symbolized the dangers of democracy and the corruption o f patriarchy. He was the male who failed to invest liberty in responsibility, only to foster disorder in the ranks of men. He refused t o assume th e famil y obligation s o f the traditiona l patriarc h o r participate i n th e benevolent governanc e o f women an d othe r dependents , a s required b y republican manhood. Sometimes he exhibited the manners of aristocratic manhood t o mas k hi s lustfu l desires , an d ofte n h e wor e th e guis e o f self-mad e manhood t o justif y hi s selfishness . Th e Bachelo r brok e al l th e rule s i n th e grammar of manhood. H e was unsettled in intergenerational tim e and continental space, unfit fo r fraternal societ y and estranged from it s natural leaders, and destructive of republican virtues and institutions. The founders associate d him wit h th e promiscuity , licentiousness , se x crimes, itinerancy , pauperism , frontier lawlessness , racia l taboos , an d martia l violenc e tha t destroye d fami lies, fostered socia l anarchy, and invited political tyranny . American leaders applied the grammar of manhood to stigmatize, ridicule, degrade, an d humiliat e th e Bachelo r b y portraying hi m a s a man-child wh o did not merit the rights of men, fraternal respect , or civic standing. Their in formal bu t influentia l messag e wa s tha t immatur e male s wer e no t fre e an d equal men so much as overgrown children who should be excluded from pub lic discourse, citizenship, and authority. Males who heeded the message might avoid exclusion by conforming t o consensual norms of manhood and settling into family responsibilities and community respectability. Those who ignored the message exposed themselves to a coercive criminal justice system designed to control and penalize but also to rehabilitate males identified wit h subordinated masculinities. When James Winthrop wrote that "it is necessary that the sober and industrious . . . should be defended fro m th e rapacity and violence of the vicious an d idle, " he was asserting polit e society' s deman d t o b e protected against the Bachelor and other disorderly men. 1 52

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 5 3

The English Bachelor and Redcoat Late-seventeenth-century Englan d hoste d a debat e o n libert y an d disorder . The Bachelo r represente d disorder . Mar y Astell expresse d a commo n view point: "H e wh o live s single tha t h e may indulg e licentiousnes s an d giv e u p himself to the conduct o f wild and ungovernable desires . . . can never justif y his ow n conduc t no r clea r i t fro m th e imputatio n o f wickedness an d folly. " The Bachelor's wickedness was manifested in his unrestrained sexuality. He seduced women but refused t o recognize his offspring. Aphra Behn wrote, "The roving youth in every shade / Has left some sighing and abandon'd Maid / For tis a fatal lesso n he has learn cl / After fruitio n ne'r e to b e concern'd." Critic s attacked "th e compleat beau" who produced ruined women and bastard children, curse d "predator y males " fo r leveragin g lus t int o drinking , gambling , and crime , and linke d th e libertin e t o gang s such a s the "Roysters , Hectors , Bucks, Bravados, Blades, [and ] Bloods " that wreaked havoc in towns. Critics also condemned the Bachelor for spreading an antimarital gospel that equated bachelorhood to freedom an d marriage to slavery. For instance, Robert Gould warned men who valued their liberty to steer clear of the "wild, rocky matrimonial sea." 2 Writers stigmatized the Bachelor as more slave than man. The Bachelor was a slave to lust, impulse, an d avarice . He lacke d self-restraint , rationality , an d virtue, and lived by his "appetites" in a "lapsed state of mankind." He suffere d an "inconstancy" tha t rendere d hi s word meaningless , his behavior frivolous , and his actions erratic. Women coul d not trus t him t o be other than a rogue, and men did not expect him to be a trustworthy neighbor. He also was a slave to "unnatural " proclivitie s associate d wit h th e effeminat e "fop " who dwelle d on appearances , haunte d sporting , gambling , an d prostitutio n houses , an d cleaved t o th e lates t fashio n i n "Galli c lust. " On e satiris t wrote , "Fa r muc h more time men triflin g waste / E'er thei r soft bodie s can be drest / The look ing glass hangs befor e / And eac h o ' th ' leg s requires a n hour. " Critic s ofte n condemned th e fop's abnormal sexuality. One pamphleteer announced , "Th e world is changed I know not how / Fo r men kiss men, not women no w . . . / A most unmanl y tric k / On e ma n t o lick the other's cheek." 3 The Bachelor s lust drew him alternately to the prostitute s parlor and to a comrade s chamber. Some writers sa w the Bachelo r a s seditious. H e faile d t o father legitimat e sons to replenis h th e rank s o f freeholders dedicate d t o defendin g liberty : "A bachelor of age has broken the laws of nature [and ] contributes little or nothing to th e support o f our freedoms. The mone y he pays in taxe s is inconsiderable to the supplies given by others in children, which are an addition to the

54 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

native strength of the kingdom. . . . A bachelor can, in no sense, be esteemed a good Englishman." 4 The Bachelor was isolated in time. Having squandered any patrimony and sired no legitimate children, he was estranged from th e intergenerational bond s o f family an d nation . The Bachelo r was also unsettle d in space. He wandered the English countryside and cities in search of pleasure, threatened othe r men' s families an d property , an d claime d right s without re sponsibilities. What shoul d be done with this parasite? Proposed solutions included preventive educatio n an d politica l remediation . Joh n Locke' s Some Thoughts Concerning Education was a primer for fathers to teach sons self-discipline an d social civility in anticipatio n o f manhood, marriage , an d citizenship . Other s recommended sanctions . Magistrate s shoul d arres t "strumpet s an d harlots " who made "the lewder sort of men ou t of love with matrimony, " an d legislators should enac t "compulsiv e laws" to force bachelor s to marry. One satiris t suggested that a twenty-four-year-old bachelo r should be taxed to defray costs resulting from hi s failure t o procreate freeholders, an d a twenty-five-year-ol d bachelor "ought to be reckoned superannuated an d grown an old boy and not fit t o b e truste d wit h wha t h e had , a s no t knowin g th e us e an d benefi t o f riches." Regardles s o f actua l age , " a bachelor i s a minor" wh o "ough t t o b e under the government o f the parish." 5 Critics hope d t o haste n th e Bachelor' s progres s t o marriag e b y reformin g male manners and female morality . Locke's protege, the third earl of Shaftes bury (Anthony Ashley Cooper), praised the "man of sensibility" who claimed "manly liberty" to unite "a mind subordinated to reason, a temper humanized and fitted to all natural affections . . . with constant security, tranquillity, [and ] equanimity." Unlik e flatterers, seducers , an d bullies , th e gentee l ma n kne w that marriage to a good woman wed virtue to happiness. 6 Others emphasize d women's morality. David Hume saw male lust as an immutable reality. What prompted me n t o accept th e "restraint " o f marriage and "underg o cheerfull y all the fatigues and expenses to which it subjects men" was their egotistical desire to clone themselves b y siring legitimate sons. Men coul d satisf y tha t desire only if they could find faithful wives . Accordingly, the Bachelor was more likely to choose marriage when female fidelity was fortified. 7 Where education an d remediation failed , th e Bachelor was apt to embroil himself in family feuds , gambling debts, and crime. He often escape d harm's way by being sent to or enlisting in England's standing army. John Trenchard complained, "Ou r prison s ar e so many storehouse s t o replenis h [th e king's ] troops." Trenchard considere d th e marginal male s who composed th e army's rank-and-file redcoat s to be rogues and mercenaries whose anarchist bent was

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 5 5 commandeered b y corrupt , aristocrati c officer s usin g draconia n disciplin e t o mold th e arm y t o th e king' s despoti c will . Critic s accuse d th e office r corp s o f synthesizing libertinis m an d brutalit y int o a n instrumen t o f monarchica l tyranny. 8 Observing th e standin g arm y i n peacetime , William Prynn e asked , "Wha t do thes e soldiers do al l day?" He answered , "Thes e lusty men spen d thei r tim e eating, drinking , whoring , sleepin g an d standin g watc h . . . mak e of f wit h wives an d daughter s an d leav e no t a few grea t bellie s an d bastard s o n th e in habitants o f th e country' s charge. " Trenchar d note d tha t th e arm y rendere d "men useles s t o labo r an d almos t propagation , togethe r wit h a muc h greate r destruction o f them, b y taking the m fro m a laborious wa y of living to a loos e idle life. " Tha t loos e idl e lif e encompasse d "th e insolenc e o f th e officer s an d the debaucheries tha t ar e committed bot h b y them an d thei r soldiers in al l th e towns they come in . . . an d a numerous trai n of mischiefs besides , almost end less t o enumerate. " Joh n Tolan d liste d amon g redcoa t mischief s "frequen t robberies, burglaries , rapes , rapines , murders , an d barbarou s cruelties. " An drew Fletche r accuse d libertin e officer s o f "debaucher y an d wickedness " a s well a s "frauds , oppressions , an d cruelties." 9 If th e Bachelor' s wickednes s wa s eviden t i n hi s tendenc y t o se e a woman' s ruin a s " a step t o reputation " a s he buil t "hi s ow n hono r o n he r infamy, " th e Redcoat's vices were manifeste d i n hi s tendenc y t o spea k patriotis m bu t prac tice selfishness. Toland noted , "I f one . . . who woul d pas s fo r a patriot ha s a n interest separat e fro m tha t o f th e public , h e i s n o longe r entitle d t o thi s de nomination; bu t h e i s a rea l hypocrit e that' s read y t o sacrific e th e commo n good t o hi s privat e gain. " The ide a tha t onl y "sober , industriou s freemen " i n the militi a (a s oppose d t o "ignorant , idle , an d needy " redcoats ) wer e suffi ciently trustworthy t o bear arms was the basis for a century-long attac k on th e standing army as an engine of anarchy and tyranny . That attac k often returne d to th e Bachelor . Demobilize d soldier s wer e mostl y singl e males , man y o f whom travele d t o Londo n wher e the y joined "loos e fellows " engage d i n anti social activit y an d crimina l behavior. 10 Toland condemne d th e Bachelor an d th e Redcoat fo r bein g estranged fro m the deepes t stirring s o f manhood, th e desire for symboli c immortality tha t in spired self-sacrifice fro m th e procreative father, industriou s freeholder , an d pa triotic militiaman . H e wrote : All me n woul d liv e somewhere eternall y i f they could , an d the y affec t t o be come immorta l eve n her e o n earth . To hav e their name s perpetuate d wa s th e true sprin g of several great me n s actions; and fo r tha t onl y end hav e they patiently undergone all manner of toil and danger. But this inclination neve r dis-

$6 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men covers itself so plainly as in the care men tak e of their posterity. Some are content to live beggars all their days that their children afte r the m ma y be rich, for they look upon thes e as their ow n persons multiplied b y propagation; whenc e some a s ha d non e themselve s adopte d th e childre n o f other s t o bea r thei r names.11 English critic s stigmatize d th e Bachelo r an d th e Redcoa t fo r sterility . The y demonstrated n o commitmen t t o family , friends , o r nation . The y procreate d nothing of public value. They were destructive children who live d solely in th e present, wher e the y generate d socia l disorde r an d fostere d politica l tyranny . Like minors , the y neede d t o b e governed .

Americas Vilest Race of Men The Englis h introduce d th e Bachelo r int o American discours e a s early as 1623, when Si r George Ferrar s condemned Virgini a colonizer s a s "unruly sparks, . . . poor gentlemen , broke n tradesmen , rake s and libertines , footmen. " Si r Edwi n Sandys hope d t o cal m colonia l disorder s b y sendin g wome n t o Americ a t o marry thes e disorderly me n an d mak e the m "mor e settled. " Colonia l adminis trators experimente d wit h lan d incentive s t o encourag e me n t o marr y an d penalties t o discourag e length y bachelorhood . Nonetheless , a 1708 missionar y report criticize d th e inhabitants o f Carolina a s "the vilest race of men upo n th e earth . . . bankrupts, pirates , decaye d libertines , sectaries , an d enthusiast s . . . of large and loos e principles." 12 These me n di d no t measur e u p t o manhood . No America n enjoye d ridiculin g th e Bachelo r mor e tha n Benjami n Franklin. I n "Th e Speec h o f Polly Baker," h e tol d th e stor y o f a trial i n whic h Polly stoo d accuse d o f bearin g bastar d children . Sh e defende d hersel f wit h three arguments. First , she stated tha t i t could no t possibl y be a crime to prop agate th e specie s an d ad d subject s t o th e king' s dominions . Second , sh e sup ported he r ow n childre n who , therefore , wer e n o burde n t o th e community . Third, sh e ha d consente d t o a marriag e proposa l fro m th e fathe r o f he r first child, bu t h e abandoned he r an d th e child . Poll y concluded tha t th e Bachelo r was the rea l culprit: "Tak e into your wise consideration th e grea t an d growin g number o f bachelor s i n th e country , man y o f whom , fro m th e mea n fea r o f the expenses o f a family, hav e never sincerely and honorabl y courte d a woma n in thei r lives ; and b y thei r manne r o f living leav e unproduce d (whic h i s littl e better tha n murder ) hundred s o f their posterity to th e thousandth generation . Is no t thi s a greater offens e agains t th e publi c goo d tha n mine? " The Bache lor's selfishnes s wa s a crim e agains t natur e an d natio n tha t wa s magnifie d b y

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 5 7 what Rober t Gros s characterize s a s a n "epidemic " o f premarita l sex and chil dren conceive d ou t o f wedlock i n th e las t hal f o f th e eighteent h century. 13 The founder s als o ridicule d th e age d bachelo r fo r promiscuit y an d irre sponsibility. W h e n Abigai l Adam s wrot e Joh n Adam s tha t a caniste r fro m Philadelphia ha d no t arrived , Joh n replie d tha t h e ha d give n i t t o Elbridg e Gerry, "a n ol d bachelor " won t t o ge t distracted . Abigai l speculate d tha t "per haps h e finds i t ver y har d t o leav e hi s mistress. " Sh e adde d t o th e fu n a yea r later b y tellin g John abou t a n ol d Bosto n merchant , " a bachelor, " accuse d o f hoarding good s an d pric e gouging . On e hundre d wome n "seize d hi m b y th e neck an d tosse d hi m int o th e cart. " Next , the y brok e int o hi s warehouse an d distributed hi s goods , whil e " a larg e concours e o f me n stoo d amazed , silen t spectators o f th e whol e transaction. " John' s light-hearte d respons e wa s tha t "the wome n i n Bosto n begi n t o thin k themselve s abl e t o serv e thei r coun try." 14 Th e remarkabl e thin g abou t thi s exchang e i s tha t bot h Adamse s wer e consistently horrifie d b y mob action s bu t responde d her e with humor , appar ently becaus e th e "victim " was a bachelor wh o stoo d beneat h men' s contemp t and, importantly , beyon d th e protectio n o f law . Early American fiction wa s filled with moralit y tale s about selfis h bachelor s who scheme d t o conquer girls' chastity and acquir e their family fortunes . Roy all Tyler's "Th e Contrast " focuse d o n youn g Mr . Dimple , wh o se t hi s sight s on th e heart s an d purs e string s o f severa l innocen t girls . Tyler mad e i t clea r that Dimpl e wa s n o man . Rather , h e wa s a "deprave d wretc h whos e onl y virtue is a polished exterior ; who i s actuated b y the unmanl y ambitio n o f con quering th e defenseless ; whos e heart , insensitiv e t o th e emotion s o f patrio tism, dilates at the plaudits of every unthinking girl; whose laurels are the sigh s and tear s o f th e miserabl e victim s o f hi s speciou s behavior. " Fortunately , th e aptly name d Colone l Manl y save d th e wome n b y unmaskin g Dimple' s de ceptions an d banishin g hi m fro m polit e society . Manl y wa s a "good " bache lor, but h e was atypical. H e considere d hi s "lat e soldiers" his family; h e was s o virtuous tha t wome n mistoo k hi m fo r a marrie d man ; an d h e stil l hope d t o wed on e o f "hi s fai r countrywomen. " Mos t writer s recognize d tha t wome n could no t coun t o n a Colone l Manl y t o defen d them . Joe l Barlo w suggeste d that women do n th e armor o f virtue t o protect themselve s from "th e powder' d coxcomb an d th e flaunting beau, " an d Judit h Sargen t Murra y advise d tha t women acquir e a substantial educatio n t o se t themselve s "abov e th e snare s o f the artfu l betrayer." 15 Ideally, th e identificatio n o f the Bachelo r wit h unmanl y conduc t wa s suffi cient t o promp t mos t youn g me n t o disciplin e thei r sexualit y a s a mean s t o achieve manhood. A young Georg e Washington recognize d th e danger o f sen-

58 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men suality an d sough t t o liv e "retire d fro m youn g women, " tha t h e migh t bur y that "troublesom e passio n i n th e grav e o f oblivio n o r eterna l forgetfulness. " The olde r Washingto n warne d youn g mal e relative s t o bewar e o f lust . H e wrote a grandson tha t he had bee n tol d "o f your devotin g much tim e and pay ing much attentio n t o a certain young lady" and counsele d tha t "thi s is not th e time fo r a boy of your ag e to ente r int o engagement s whic h migh t en d i n sor row an d repentance. " H e cautione d othe r youn g me n t o avoi d "scene s o f dissipation an d vic e which to o ofte n presen t themselve s t o yout h i n ever y plac e and particularl y in towns. " Instead, the y should kee p compan y onl y with "th e best kind. " Similarly , Jame s Madiso n warne d a classmat e t o avoi d imprope r company: "Pra y do not suffer thos e impertinent fop s tha t abound i n every city to diver t yo u fro m you r business . . . . [Keep ] the m a t a becomin g distance. " John Adam s deteste d urba n infestation s o f impertinen t youn g men . H e ad vised Americans t o lear n fro m th e exampl e o f "th e Coven t Garde n rake " wh o "will never be wise enough t o tak e warning from th e clap s caught b y his com panions." Enslave d b y passion , "thre e ou t o f four " youn g me n wh o wer e "poxed" became "even by their own suffering s mor e shameless instead of being penitent." 16 Venerea l diseas e was th e Bachelor' s pervers e badg e o f honor . Unfortunately, th e Bachelor' s perversit y wa s infectious . Th e libertin e wh o bragged abou t hi s sexua l conquest s wa s likel y t o influenc e impressionabl e boys with misguide d notion s o f manhood. A176 3 Bosto n articl e contraste d a sensible manhoo d base d o n "knowledg e an d civility " with a false masculinit y constituted b y "cavalier-like principles of honor" which declare d that "boxing , clubs, or firearms ar e resorted t o for decidin g every quarrel about a girl, a game of cards, o r an y little acciden t tha t win e o r foll y o r jealousy ma y suspec t t o b e an affront." Th e autho r note d tha t a "delicate and manl y way of thinking" was conducive "t o th e peac e o f society, " wherea s th e Bachelor' s fals e "gallantry " produced amon g th e educate d a "smooth-speaking clas s of people who mea n to ge t thei r livin g out o f others" and, i n th e lower ranks , " a disrespect t o ever y personage i n a civil character." The Bachelor' s mischie f had t o b e stopped les t it foste r amon g youn g me n th e growt h o f upper-clas s corruptio n an d lower class chaos. 17 Sometimes, th e founder s chastise d th e Bachelo r b y accusing him o f effem inacy an d luxury ; ofte n times , the y degrade d hi m fo r hi s unmanl y selfishnes s and slavery to desire; most o f the time, they humiliated hi m fo r bein g less tha n a man—fo r bein g a boy . Benjami n Frankli n pointe d ou t tha t th e Bachelo r often consorte d wit h boys . He lure d the m int o vice by filling thei r head s wit h visions o f "ga y living," distracte d the m fro m "th e dul l way s o f getting mone y by working," an d tempte d the m int o littl e dishonesties, followe d b y "other s a

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 5 9

little more knavish," until a youngster became "a consummate rasca l and villain." The Bachelo r himself was but a grown boy , in that " a man's value" was diminished when he did not head a family. H e was only "half a man." Labeling an adul t mal e a "grown boy " o r "hal f man" ha d consequences . A whole man had a presumptive claim to manly freedom an d independence, but a boy was still a dependent minor in need of guidance and governance. Jeremiah Atwater likene d libertine s t o boy s who lacke d "manlines s o f manne r an d per sonal independence" t o legitimize disciplining them ; anothe r writer went s o far as to recommend tha t "th e whole power of government should be exerted to suppress them." 18

The Bachelor within All Men The Bachelo r coul d no t b e wholly suppresse d becaus e h e existe d within al l men. Most founder s sa w males as inherently passionate creature s whose sexual propensities were emblematic of their overall inability to resist temptation. Benjamin Rus h typified me n as self-absorbed individual s who engaged in the "solitary vice" of masturbation a s well as the social vice of promiscuity. Ben jamin Frankli n though t young males were especially lustful creature s subjec t to "violen t natura l inclinations. " They sough t an d enjoye d se x but faile d t o recognize or respect the obligations attendant to paternity. They also failed t o demonstrate much concern for their own health, morality, wealth, and famil y prospects. Franklin confesse d tha t the "hard-to-govern passio n of youth" had hurried hi m "int o intrigue s wit h lo w women, " an d h e employe d Poo r Richard's voice to warn young men, "Women and Wine / Game and Deceit / Make the wealth small / And the wants great." 19 Thomas Jefferson agree d that natur e embedded lus t in men's constitutio n and that "the commerce of love" was indulged on "this unhallowed principle." Unfortunately, "intrigue s of love [that] occupy the young" tended to "nourish and invigorate all our bad passions" rather than prepare men to achieve "conjugal love" and "domestic happiness." According to Bernard Bailyn, Jefferson viewed "sexual promiscuity [as ] the ultimate corruption." He confessed t o his own youthfu l indiscretion s wit h "ba d company " an d urged youn g me n t o practice sexual self-denial. H e warned a grandson t o avoid "taverns, drinkers, smokers, idlers, and dissipated persons," especially loose women. He opposed sending a young man t o polish his education i n Europe, where he was likely to be "led by the strongest of all human passions into a spirit of female intrigue destructive of his own and others' happiness, or a passion for whores destruc-

6o I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

tive of his own health." However, he praised a French mother who sought t o save her seventeen-year-old so n from Europea n "excesses " by sending him t o America, because education was "more masculine here and less exposed to seduction." Georg e Washington mad e a finer domestic distinction. H e advised one o f his grandsons t o transfe r t o a college i n Massachusetts , where youn g men "ar e less prone t o dissipatio n an d debaucher y tha n the y ar e in college s south of it." 20 The founder s feare d tha t youthful debaucher y had lifelong consequences . Thomas Pain e stated tha t a young ma n wh o consorte d wit h prostitute s was "unfitted t o choos e o r judg e o f a wife." Jefferso n adde d tha t suc h a yout h "learns to consider fidelity to the marriage bed as an ungentlemanly practice." Sexual license in boyhood undermined a young man's chance for marital happiness. It either confirmed hi m i n bachelorhood b y exposing him t o alterna tive sexua l outlet s o r dre w hi m int o unworkabl e marriages . Charle s Carrol l fretted tha t few males restrained lust long enough to choose a proper spouse. He warned, "Beauty . .. affect s ou r propensity to lust so strongly that it makes most matches, and most of those miserable." John Adams asserted, "The first want of man is his dinner, and the second his girl. . . . the second want is frequently s o impetuous a s to mak e me n an d women forge t th e first and rus h into rash marriages, leaving both the first and second wants, their own as well as those of their children an d grandchildren, t o the chapter o f accidents." To avoid this chapter o f accidents, Noah Webster proposed tha t " a young man's best securit y agains t . . . dissipated life " was t o cultivat e " a fondness fo r th e company and conversation o f ladies of character." 21 Young men who rushed into bad marriages could expect pain and humiliation. Man y would experienc e miser y in thei r famil y lives , lending credenc e to the libertine's definition o f liberty as freedom fro m marriage . Others would betray their marriage vows and suffer th e sting of public disapprobation. Jacob Rush condemne d men' s adulter y a s "a cruel breec h o f trust" tha t "tend s di rectly to destroy families" and "tears up the very foundation o f society." When men "abando n themselve s t o adulterou s courses, " they nullify th e "solemni ties of an oath" and foster a "universal depravity of morals" that "mus t utterly destroy society." Even youth wh o chos e virtuous wives were adultery-prone . In 1797 , Alexander Hamilto n publishe d a remarkabl e pamphle t t o confes s that "th e ardo r o f passion " le d hi m int o a n adulterou s affai r wit h Mari a Reynolds. He apologized for the pain that he caused his wife (" a bosom eminently entitled to all my gratitude, fidelity, and love") but explained that public confession wa s his only defense "agains t a more heinous charge" of financial corruption mad e by Reynolds's husband. Hamilto n suffere d humiliatio n

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 61

when critics attacked him as an faithless man "who had the cruelty publicly to wound and insult the feelings of his family." Still, his apology implied that all men hav e an ardo r o f passion, many give in t o it, and mos t rel y on virtuou s wives to pardon the m for it. Ruth Bloc h reminds us that a common figure in early American fiction was "the adulterous husband redeeme d b y his faithfu l and forgiving wife." 22 American civi c leader s wh o denounce d promiscuit y wante d t o d o mor e than monito r mal e sexuality . They believe d tha t men' s "inabilit y t o contro l sexual impulse indicated a more dangerous inability to control all vicious impulses of the self." Authorities stigmatized male promiscuity to deter it and legitimize coerciv e controls o n th e me n mos t closel y associated with it . Colo nial government s ofte n require d bachelor s t o liv e i n famil y households , as suming that single males "lack someone . . . t o hold them within th e bound s of order." Connecticut fined bachelors who did not reside in family dwellings, and Marylan d enacte d punitiv e taxe s o n them . Meanwhile , magistrate s an d courts made bachelors liable for their sexual misdeeds. Especially in New England, governments prosecuted white bastardy cases to establish paternity, force fathers t o support thei r illegitimat e families , an d "preven t fatherles s childre n and unwe d mother s fro m becomin g tow n charges. " Thoug h thi s juridica l quest fo r sexua l purity an d financial responsibilit y flagged by the mid-eigh teenth century, leaders' suspicions of male desire persisted. 23 Most founder s sa w mal e sexualit y a s a seedbe d o f disorder . The y urge d young man to channel sexual energy into monogamous marriage which, Mary Beth Norton notes, was conceived as an "indispensable duty" and "debt to society." Their effort s wer e abette d b y writers wh o portraye d bachelorhoo d a s painful an d marriage as pleasurable. On the one hand, Judith Sargent Murray proclaimed, "Th e lif e o f th e bachelo r i s almost invariabl y gloomy. " H e wa s "alone in th e universe. " He confesse d t o himself, "N o youn g props list thei r green head s fo r my support ; no t a n individua l o f th e risin g generatio n i s bound to me by the silken bands of attachment. . . . When I expire, my name will b e extinct , an d al l remembranc e o f m e will ceas e from th e earth! " Th e Bachelor was "truly pitiable." On th e other hand , Benjami n Rus h proposed , men coul d achiev e a sense of fulfillment i n marriage s founde d o n share d af fection, mutual respect, and children. His letters to his betrothed, Julia Stockton, ooze d republica n romance . Rus h decrie d hi s years a s a selfish bachelor . He looked to Julia to "point out to me the duty and happiness of a life of piety and usefulness." H e forswore th e ostensible joys of bachelorhood "a s nothing when set in competition with you" and pledged to earn Julia's eternal love by serving the poor and becoming a better patriot.24 Colonial leaders often relie d

6i I

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

on coercion to prevent the Bachelor from infectin g othe r men; the foundin g generation usually solicited men's consent to sexual self-discipline i n anticipation of monogamous marriage .

Other Disorderly Men Some me n wer e unmove d b y threats o f coercion o r plea s fo r self-discipline . They indulge d thei r desire s t o crimina l extremes . The y wer e guilty o f se x crimes such as rape and sodomy or engaged in lawless conduct associated with itinerancy, vagrancy , pauperism, an d frontie r anarchy . These disorderl y me n may have been relativel y few in number, bu t thei r "seditiou s and disorganiz ing spirit " wa s though t "contagious. " Nathanae l Emmon s contende d tha t men infatuated wit h themselves were apt to reject al l authority and "imagin e that there is little or no criminality." A few disorderly men could be a "leaven of rebellion" that "poisone d the minds of many" and destroyed "th e bands of society. ^ In postrevolutionar y Ne w Yor k City , youn g me n joine d "crowd s o f 'bloods' . . . who lounged o n city sidewalks and, affecting th e contemptuou s stance o f th e aristocrati c libertine , tosse d provocativ e remark s a t an y singl e woman who passed." These "self-styled libertines " were known fo r thei r sexual aggression and their tendency to make contempt fo r women an "emble m of high style. " Some went beyon d provocativ e words t o violent deeds , to b e charged with "attempted rape" or "rape." The former charg e referred t o coercive sexual act s u p t o an d includin g forcibl e penetration . Th e mor e seriou s latter charg e involve d penetratio n an d ejaculation. 26 Ne w Yor k legislator s wanted t o penaliz e unbridle d mal e sexuality , especiall y whe n i t wa s ap t t o produce dependent bastards . Marybeth Hamilto n Arnol d state s tha t th e foundin g generatio n con demned rap e a s " a horrid crime " tha t excite d "universa l abhorrence. " Cer tainly, some American men blamed the victim. In one case, the defense attor ney claimed his client, the accused rapist, had been seduced by a carnal thir teen-year-old girl . However , th e founder s mostl y blame d mal e rapist s fo r violence against innocent females. Josiah Quincy was outraged by the "bruta l ravisher." John Adams attacked redcoats for having "debauched" Boston girls and Davi d Ramsa y cursed British and Hessia n troop s for "rape s and brutali ties committe d o n wome n an d eve n o n ver y youn g girls. " Criminologis t William Bradfor d condemne d rap e a s a n unmanl y crim e tha t demande d manly vengeance: "Female innocence has strong claims upon our protection ,

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 6 3

and a desire to avenge its wrongs is natural to a generous and manly mind." 27 Penal codes commonly called for capita l punishment . Abhorrence of rape, laws forbidding it , and hanging for those convicted of it resulte d i n fe w prosecutions , convictions , o r executions . American jurist s seemed nearl y a s eage r t o coddl e th e crimina l a s t o condem n th e crime . William Pen n trie d t o liberalize colonial Pennsylvania' s rap e law by reducing a first-time rapist s punishmen t t o a fine and on e yea r i n priso n an d b y reserving for the repeat offender a penalty of life imprisonment. Penn' s reform s were vetoed by the Crown. After th e Revolution, Pennsylvania led the nation in liberalizing English law. It eliminated th e death penalty for rap e and substituted a maximum penalt y o f propert y forfeitur e an d te n year s imprison ment. Why condemn the crime but reduce the penalty? William Bradford explained tha t rap e was rooted i n "th e sudden abus e of a natural passion " an d "perpetrated i n a frenzy o f desire." I t was a n "atrocity " tha t shoul d b e pun ished. But because it was an atrocity rooted in natural passion rathe r tha n i n the "incorrigibility of the criminal," the rapist did not suffer a n "irreclaimabl e corruption" tha t demanded death . H e could b e rehabilitated. As Joel Barlow put it , " a wise and manl y government" administere d " a tender paterna l cor »28

rection. ° Bradford observe d tha t judge s an d jurie s rarel y convicte d a man o f rap e when the y knew th e penalty would b e death. N o jury would convic t a husband fo r forcibl y exercisin g hi s se x righ t withi n marriage , an d fe w jurist s would hang a man fo r submitting to frenzied desire . One reason for lenienc y was the widespread belief that the injury to the rape victim was largely a matter of perception. Bradfor d wrote , "It cannot be denied that much o f [rape's ] atrocity reside s in th e imagination. " Rap e was thought mos t injuriou s whe n committed agains t a woman o f high "rank " and "character, " less so when th e victim was a servant girl, and least harmful whe n it involved "the violation of a female slave. " Because rape was often a class crime committed b y high-status male s agains t lower-clas s women , jurie s "frequentl y trea t thi s charg e s o lightly a s t o acqui t agains t positiv e an d uncontradicte d evidence." 29 Judge s and juries were reluctant to impose lethal penalties on perpetrators. Nonetheless, antirape rhetoric and laws communicated th e cultural message that me n should exercise sexual self-restraint and deserved punishment when they failed to do so. The foundin g generatio n allie d sexual self-restraint t o avoidance of samesex relationships, whic h represente d a "potentia l i n th e lustfu l natur e o f all men" and "a potential for disorder in the cosmos." During the eighteenth century, publi c perceptio n transforme d sodom y fro m a mortal si n agains t Go d

G\ I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men into a passion "agains t th e order o f nature" and, therefore , a n abuse of the nat ural law s tha t regulate d "th e peace , government , an d dignit y o f th e state. " W h y di d privat e sexua l act s hav e publi c meaning ? Joh n Winthrop' s explana tion wa s th e endurin g one . Lik e libertinis m an d masturbation , same-se x rela tions "tende d t o th e frustratin g o f th e ordinanc e o f marriag e an d th e hinder ing [of ] th e generation o f mankind." The sodomis t separate d sex and pleasur e from marriag e an d procreatio n t o unleas h passio n an d caus e chaos . Jonatha n Edwards, Jr., condemne d ancien t Greek s fo r glorifyin g "th e mos t abominabl e practices openly " an d ancien t Cretan s fo r encouragin g sodom y "t o preven t too grea t a n increas e o f th e people, " becaus e h e believe d tha t same-se x rela tions erode d men' s commitmen t t o famil y responsibilities. 30 Sodomy, lik e rape , wa s a capita l offens e tha t wa s rarel y prosecuted . Brad ford wante d t o eliminat e th e deat h penalt y fo r "th e crim e agains t nature. " After all , America wa s " a country wher e marriage s tak e plac e s o early, and th e intercourse betwee n th e sexes is not difficult. " Wit h female s abundan t an d ac cessible, n o matur e mal e ha d goo d reaso n t o b e draw n int o a same-se x rela tionship. Indeed , "th e wretch wh o perpetrate s [sodomy ] mus t b e i n a state o f mind whic h ma y occasio n u s t o doub t whethe r h e b e Sui Juris a t th e time ; o r whether h e reflects o n th e punishment a t all." Bradford sa w sodomy a s a man ifestation o f a sort o f temporary insanit y i n a man enslave d b y unnatural , ex cessive sexua l appetites. 31 Becaus e th e insanit y wa s temporary , a ma n con victed o f sodomy coul d b e rehabilitated . If American leader s sa w rapist s an d sodomist s a s se x criminals , the y con sidered itinerant s know n a s the "strollin g poor" a s suspects. The strollin g poo r were young me n wh o roame d fro m tow n t o tow n i n searc h o f work, land , o r adventure. Townspeople greete d thes e stranger s wit h grav e distrust . Afte r all , they wer e young , rootless , an d unpredictabl e males—threat s t o daughters ' virtue, wives ' fidelity, men' s property , an d publi c coffers . Official s examine d them fo r sign s o f drunkennes s an d povert y les t the y becom e a sourc e o f dis order o r a burden o n th e community . Village s ofte n "warne d out " itinerants . Magistrates gav e thes e transient s a few day s t o secur e a sponsor, pos t a bond , or exit . Those wh o faile d t o sin k root s o r leav e coul d b e sen t t o th e stock s o r the whippin g post . Man y wer e escorte d t o thei r las t know n residence , wher e they might agai n b e removed "unti l the y reached th e en d o f the line—usuall y their birt h place." 32 The stigm a agains t transienc e wa s pervasive . Loca l leader s distruste d itin erant preacher s wh o travele d fro m tow n t o town , scorne d establishe d minis ters an d fixed house s o f worship , an d hel d religiou s service s i n ope n fields. Analogously, mos t founder s feare d th e public's "transien t impressions " and re -

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 6 5

lied on elite s to protect me n agains t their fleeting fancies. Civi c leaders especially despised transient vagrants and paupers who did not fit into orderly society. They wer e rootles s me n though t t o we d mora l deficienc y t o poverty . Benjamin Franklin wa s horrified tha t Grea t Britai n exhibite d th e "unexam pled barbarity " t o "empt y [its ] jail s int o ou r settlements " an d fill colonia l America with "vagrant s an d idl e persons" who "continu e thei r evi l practice s [and] contribute greatl y to corrupt th e morals of the servants and th e poore r people among whom they mix." After the Revolution, Raymond Mohl writes, civic spokesme n denounce d th e "idle , ignorant , immoral , impious , an d vi cious" paupers whose ranks included "immigran t wanderers, soldiers, sailors, prostitutes, peddlers, beggars, thieves, and rogues [and] the idle and profligat e banditti," who "begged , stole , disturbed th e peace, drank t o excess , and . . . committed 'shamefu l enormities.' " Thes e unsettle d me n wer e a significan t source of disorder. 33 The frontie r versio n o f vagrants an d pauper s was backwoodsmen. Creve coeur s American Farme r sa w backwoodsmen a s me n drive n b y misfortun e into the wilderness, where they roamed about with little or no government supervision. The y tende d t o b e intemperate , greedy , profligate , lawles s me n prone to conflict and violence. They survived by hunting, led "a licentious idle life" of "rapacity and injustice," an d behaved "n o better than carnivorous animals." Georg e Washingto n calle d the m "banditti " becaus e the y stol e th e "cream of the country" despit e the fact tha t "officer s an d soldier s . . . fough t and bled to obtain it." Washington als o rebuked frontier "lan d jobbers, speculators, and monopolisers" as "avaricious men" whose "unrestrained conduct " caused conflict an d promised " a great deal of bloodshed." White backwoods men an d speculator s me t thei r anarchi c matc h i n American India n peoples . Many founders admire d India n culture s but attacke d India n me n a s savages. Franklin stressed that they were "apt to get drunk" and become "very quarrelsome an d disorderly, " an d Jefferso n warne d tha t thei r intemperat e us e o f "spirituous liquors " ofte n le d t o violence . Whil e Franklin sa w India n alco holism as part of "the design of Providence to extirpate these savages in order to make room for cultivators of the earth," Jefferson hope d that Indians would enter into "a state of agriculture."34 Either way, the founders agree d that earth belonged to sober, settled farmers . This juxtaposition o f disorderly backwoodsmen an d greedy speculators on the one hand an d intemperate, itineran t Indian s on th e other made the fron tier a dangerous place. Doreen Alvarez Saar reports that American leaders worried that the conjuncture o f these peoples would produce a promiscuous mixing of European stock with the indigenous population. The result would be "a

66 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men mongrel breed" that combined the vices of both populations and created a people "of unpleasant and immoral character." Founders such as Washington saw the frontie r a s combustible. Whites sol d liquo r t o Indians , deceive d an d de frauded them , an d stol e thei r land s onl y t o inflam e th e passion s o f Indians, who reacte d lik e "wil d beast s o f th e forest " b y takin g u p "th e hatchet. " H e hoped that white men would purchase Indian land. That way, "the gradual extension of our settlements will as certainly cause the savage as the wolf to retire, both being beasts of prey."35 For many founders, disorderly white men were the primary problem on the frontier bu t the removal of Indians was the preferre d solution. Their analysis of slaveholders and slaves was quite similar.

Slaveholders and Slaves White mal e slaveholders face d dail y sexual temptation . Davi d Ramsa y criticized them for engaging in "early, excessive, and enervating indulgences" with slave women. A South Carolina champion of slavery warned that white men's "inconsiderate debaucheries" with female slaves were producing a "jumble of colors" in the population. A Kentuckian opposed to slavery bemoaned the loss of "worth and dignity" among those "pernicious pests of society" who "gratif y their lust " b y rapin g slav e women wh o migh t b e "thei r ow n sister s o r eve n their aunts." A Connecticut abolitionis t attacked white males who "procreat e slaves" only to degrade, tyrannize, and sell their own sons and, i n the case of daughters, "forc e [them ] t o submi t t o . . . horrid an d incestuous passion." 36 White males with easy access to female slaves regularly surrendered to carnality and incest . Theodore Dwight worried that this surrender weakened white men's commitment to family responsibilities and sensibilities. White males compounded the sin of adultery with female slaves when they failed t o exhibit "th e protection, the support, an d the affection o f a father" towar d their mixed-race children. Jefferson suggeste d tha t white self-indulgence tende d t o transform lib erty into license: "The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotis m on th e on e part , an d degradin g submission s o n th e other . Ou r childre n se e this an d lear n t o imitat e it. " Davi d Ric e thought tha t master-slav e relation s undermined white manhood b y allowing masters to forsake industry by relying on slave labor. After all, "To labor is to slave, to work is to work like a Negro, and this is disgraceful; it levels us with the meanest of the species." White idleness, i n turn , beckone d kindre d vice s suc h a s "gaming , theft , robbery , o r

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 67 forgery, fo r whic h [youth ] ofte n en d thei r day s i n disgrac e o n th e gallows. " John Taylo r disagreed . Slaver y di d no t inspir e "furiou s passions " amon g whites becaus e slave s occupie d a n incomparable , distant , an d lowl y rank. In deed, slaver y invited white childre n t o lear n virtue and fee l benevolenc e whe n "seeing th e ba d qualitie s i n slaves. " Taylor believe d tha t slaver y mad e libert y more preciou s t o white s an d pointe d ou t tha t slav e societie s suc h a s ancien t Greece an d Rome , a s wel l a s moder n America , produce d "mor e grea t an d good patriot s an d citizen s tha n probabl y al l the res t o f the world." 37 Though th e founder s dispute d th e justice an d impac t o f slavery, the y uni formly denounced tendencie s toward miscegenation. They saw whites as a distinct species . That wa s Joh n Witherspoon' s contentio n whe n h e locate d th e tragedy o f th e Revolutio n i n th e fac t tha t me n "wh o ar e th e sam e i n com plexion, th e same i n bloo d . . . should, notwithstanding , butche r on e anothe r with unrelentin g rag e an d glor y i n th e deed. " Mos t founder s sa w black s a s "outsiders" o r "outcast s fro m humanity. " The y ha d difficult y imaginin g th e two distinc t specie s livin g togethe r i n freedo m an d harmony . Jefferson' s well known assertion s abou t inheren t racia l difference s an d antagonism s wer e adopted b y Jeffersonians suc h a s Tunis Wortman, wh o argue d tha t interracia l mingling an d marriag e wer e tantamoun t t o a "universa l prostitution " tha t would produc e " a motle y an d degenerat e rac e o f mulattos. " Othe r founder s ranted agains t "th e infamy o f such a mongrel coalition, " condemne d "th e dis graceful an d unnatural " evi l of interracial unions , an d proclaime d tha t a "fre e nation o f blac k an d whit e peopl e [will ] produc e a bod y politi c a s monstrou s and unnatura l a s a mongrel hal f white ma n an d hal f negro." 38 W h y were the founders s o fearful o f race mixing? Many founders sa w black males a s oversexe d creature s whos e passion s threatene d t o degrad e th e whit e race. Jefferson observe d tha t blac k males were "more ardent afte r thei r female " but lacke d " a tender delicat e mixtur e o f sentiment an d sensation. " H e attrib uted thi s combinatio n o f blac k lus t an d coarsenes s t o blac k inferiorit y i n "body an d mind " a s well a s in "imagination, " wher e black s wer e "dull , taste less, and anomalous. " Jefferson describe d blac k males as sexually promiscuou s and culturall y sterile . H e wrote , "Neve r ye t coul d I find tha t a blac k ha d ut tered a thought abov e th e leve l o f plai n narration ; neve r se e eve n a n elemen tary trai t o f paintin g o r sculpture. " Fran k Shuffelto n remark s tha t Jefferso n was blin d t o th e richnes s o f slaves ' Africa n culture s an d t o th e creativit y o f black artisan s i n hi s ow n household. 39 Thi s blindnes s allowe d hi m an d othe r founders t o se e black male s a s creatures withou t cultur e an d t o ran k the m o n a scale of manly refinemen t wel l belo w licentiou s libertines . While white s sometime s perceive d blac k wome n t o b e "remarkabl e fo r

68 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

their chastit y an d modesty, " the y almost alway s considered blac k males' lust to be immutable. Earl y New England rap e narratives centered o n blac k lust. A1768 narrative titled The Life and Dying Speech ofArthurwas typical . Arthur was a black slave who discarde d piet y and industr y fo r a "licentious liberty " that include d drinking , promiscuity , runnin g away , theft , an d th e rap e o f a white woman , fo r whic h h e wa s hanged . Danie l William s suggest s tha t Arthur's stor y helpe d solidif y th e stereotyp e o f th e African mal e a s an "im moral, hypersexual black wildly pursuing women to satisfy his prodigal lusts." The stereotyp e wa s no t new . In 1682 , when Pennsylvani a Quaker s tried t o eliminate the death penalty for rape in the belief that rapists could be rehabilitated, the y wante d t o retai n hangin g fo r blac k rapists , apparentl y becaus e they believed black males were beyond redemption. 40 One reaso n th e founder s though t blac k mal e slave s beyon d redemptio n was that they could not assume patriarchal family responsibilities. Slave status meant tha t blac k male s had littl e contro l whe n i t cam e t o startin g families , keeping the m together , preventin g wives ' victimization , o r protectin g chil dren. Man y mal e slave s lived i n smal l household s wher e the y were isolate d from potentia l brides. Slave traders sometimes forced slav e husbands to separate fro m wive s an d children , an d slaveholder s wrot e will s tha t distribute d slave family members among dispersed heirs. Benjamin Rus h pointed out that overseers often mad e slave husbands "prostitut e thei r wives and mothers an d daughters to gratify the brutal lust of a master." As a result, male slaves had little confidenc e "i n th e fidelity o f thei r wives " an d littl e certaint y tha t thei r wives' offspring wer e their own , an d the y showed comparativel y little regar d "for thei r posterity." Even when male slaves were confident o f their paternity , they coul d no t "partak e o f thos e ineffabl e sensation s wit h whic h natur e in spires th e heart s o f fathers " becaus e thei r "paterna l fondness " wa s compro mised by the knowledge that their children would always be "slaves like themselves."41 Male slave s were i n n o positio n t o achiev e manl y master y i n thei r own families . Perhaps most founders opposed slavery and many stigmatized slaveholders for lust and brutality. Simultaneously, they saw black males as dangerous creatures who were not and never truly could be "men" because they lacked independence, self-discipline, family integrity, mastery of women, and concern for posterity. They were hypersexual, coarse beings who did not fit into polite society. Jefferso n feare d a rac e wa r fuele d b y whit e bigotr y an d blac k rage : "Deeply roote d prejudice s entertaine d b y the whites; ten thousan d recollec tions by the blacks of the injuries the y have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances divide

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 6 9

us into parties; and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination o f the one or the other race. " John Taylor opposed slaver y but detested the abolitionism tha t encouraged th e "black sansculottes" to cut masters' throats . Jefferson , Taylor , an d othe r founder s fel t tha t disorderl y white males caused mos t problem s associate d with slavery , but the y believed the removal of blacks to Africa was the primary cure for racial conflict. 42

The Refuse of the Earth The founder s hope d disorderl y whit e me n coul d redee m themselves . Th e idea of "starting over" was embedded in the myth of an American Adam free d from old-worl d corruptio n t o cultivat e th e Ne w World's Edeni c garden . I t also was etched into the image of the prodigal son who put away the past and undertook a noble pilgrimage t o posterity. Most founder s hel d ou t th e possibility of rebirth bu t the y did no t coun t o n it . They were alarmed b y men's "general sense of lawlessness" and by "disorders and deviances" that easily escalated into social chaos and political instability. Their grave concern for th e dangers associated with disorderly soldiers highlighted th e possibility that licentious males were less likely to be reformed tha n sober men were apt to be corrupted.43 Americans inherite d fro m Whi g ancestor s a loathin g fo r redcoats . Th e British quartered redcoats in the colonies after th e French and Indian War. At first, many Americans welcomed the troops as protection against hostile Indians and as consumers of local goods. Kermit Hall observes that colonists soon grew contemptuous a s "the bored troops " of idle youth "engage d in whorin g and pett y thievery. " In 1768 , Samuel Adams joine d wit h other s t o star t th e Journal of the Times, a scanda l shee t tha t attacke d redcoa t misdeeds . A . J . Langguth notes that a typical story reported tha t a local citizen "discovere d a soldier i n be d wit h hi s favorit e granddaughter. " Do n Higginbotha m high lights patriot pres s stories that decrie d "insult s t o cit y officials, assault , theft , and rape committed by Red Coats." Many Americans blamed redcoats for ruining America' s finest youn g men . "Thi s idl e an d dissipate d army, " wrot e Mercy Oti s Warren , "corrupte d th e student s o f Harvar d Colleg e an d th e youth of the capital and its environs, who were allured to enter into their gambling parties and other scenes of licentiousness." 44 Colonists considered redcoats "the refuse o f the earth." Their officers wer e "effeminate an d delicat e soldier s wh o ar e nurse d i n th e la p o f luxur y an d whose greates t exertio n i s . . . tedious attendanc e o n a masquerade o r mid -

70 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

night ball." Benjamin Frankli n attacked the British army as organized slavery. After all , "The sailor is often force d int o service . . . . The soldie r is generally bought." Redcoat s were lost in time and space. They were "generally such as have neither propert y o r families t o fight for, an d who hav e no principle either o f honor, religion , public spirit, regar d fo r liberty , or love of country t o animate them. " Man y wer e youn g me n "dragge d u p i n ignoranc e o f ever y gainful ar t an d obliged to become soldiers or servants or thieves for a subsistence." Simeon Howar d focused o n their instability. Their sole "temporal interest" was "th e promis e o f larger pay" ; they "hav e n o rea l estat e i n th e do minions which they are to defend"; an d "the y become distinguished b y their vices." The onl y reaso n t o gathe r suc h me n int o a n army , conclude d Merc y Otis Warren, was to eradicate America's "manly spirit of freedom." 45 Patriots advertised redcoat sex scandals and depravity to rally Americans to the caus e o f liberty . Warre n counte d u p "th e indiscriminat e ravage s o f th e Hessian and British soldiers" in coin of the "rape, misery, and despair" suffere d by "wives and daughters pursued and ravished in the woods" while "unfortu nate fathers i n th e stupor o f grief beheld th e miser y of their femal e connec tions without being able to relieve . . . the shrieks of infant innocenc e subjec t to the brutal lust of British Grenadiers and Hessian Yaughers." Phillips Payson asked th e rhetorica l question , "I s it possibl e fo r u s . . . t o hea r th e crie s an d screeches o f our ravishe d matron s an d virgins . . . and thin k o f returning t o that cruel and bloody power which has done all these things?" Thomas Pain e used hatred of redcoats and mercenaries to shame American men into service: "By perseverance an d fortitud e w e hav e th e prospec t o f a glorious issue ; by cowardice and submission, the sad choice of... ou r homes turned into bawdy houses for Hessians , and a future rac e to provide for, whos e fathers w e shall doubt of." 46 Onl y a n unmanl y cowar d woul d refus e t o protec t hi s mother , wife, sister, or daughter from th e degradation of bearing mercenaries' bastard children. The founder s contraste d redcoa t corruptio n t o America n militiamen' s "manly resistance " an d "manl y spirit. " The y idealize d militiame n a s famil y farmers wh o mustere d fo r servic e a s dutiful citize n soldiers . On e office r ex plained, "Ther e is a difference betwee n troops that fight only for the mastery and 6d . Sterling a day, and those that fight for thei r religion, their laws, their liberties, thei r wive s and childre n an d everythin g els e that i s dear t o them. " For the next century, Americans would attribute to regular soldiers all variants of vice and criminality but project ont o militiamen al l the virtues of republicanism. Simultaneously , however , Americans kne w tha t militi a virtues wer e often mor e symbolic than real , and they worried tha t sober family me n who

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 7 1

entered th e militi a woul d rever t t o bachelor-lik e licentiousness . Laure l Thatcher Ulric h comment s tha t Ne w Englan d minister s an d wive s com plained that freeholders i n the militia were corrupted i n camp by drink, profanity, an d blasphemy . Do n Higginbotha m report s tha t Virginia parents demanded loca l militi a officer s b e hel d accountabl e fo r overseein g thei r sons ' "moral conduct, " primaril y b y keepin g the m awa y fro m "gaming , profane ness, and debauchery." 47 General Washingto n di d no t idealiz e militiamen . H e complained , "Th e militia instead o f calling forth thei r utmos t effort s t o a brave and manl y opposition . . . ar e dismayed, intractabl e an d impatient. " Militiame n wer e un skilled and ap t t o be "timid an d read y to fly from thei r own shadows." They were "accustomed t o unbounded freedo m an d no control" and often refuse d to submit to "the restraint which is indispensably necessary to the good order and governmen t o f an army , without whic h licentiousnes s an d . . . disorder triumphantly reign. " Washington's alternativ e t o th e licentious militi a was a continental standin g army. This proposal encountere d considerabl e criticis m because, a s Russel l Weigley suggests , "Th e danger s o f a standing arm y a s a threat to liberty were close to everyone's thoughts." For example, "Caractacus" argued tha t yeomen an d artisan s serving in a standing arm y would los e "the gentleness and sobriety of citizens," while Samuel Adams and Benjamin Rus h asserted tha t regula r officer s an d soldier s would develo p a sense of separateness and superiority tending toward tyranny. 48 Americans accepte d th e standin g arm y durin g th e war , bu t the y main tained suspicion s o f i t tha t wer e periodicall y reconfirmed . Whe n voluntar y enlistments flagged and desertions flourished, the Continental army turned to bounties, bribes, and coercio n t o fill troop quotas . After 1778 , Robert Gros s notes, towns that once warned out transients began to welcome them if "they stayed onl y lon g enoug h t o hav e a drink , tak e thei r bounty , an d g o of f t o fight." Even slaves were allowed to become "men " just long enough t o enlist . Meanwhile, man y freeholder s too k advantag e o f laws that allowe d fo r mar riage exemptions, hiring substitutes, or paying monetary fines. The result was that America s regula r arm y wa s filled wit h indenture d servants , vagrants , felons, and slaves—the same riffraff tha t wore red coats. Furthermore, critic s charged the American military with aristocratic corruption. On e fruit o f that corruption, Frankli n argued , wa s th e Societ y o f th e Cincinnati , whic h wa s composed of former officers who had "been too much struck with the ribbons and crosses they have seen .. . hanging to the buttonholes of foreign officers. " William Manning condemned th e Cincinnati a s a conspiratorial, aristocrati c elite leading "a standing army of slaves to execute their arbitrary measures." 49

72 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

Antifederalists zeroe d in on th e U.S. Constitution's unificatio n o f purse and swor d a s a foundation fo r tyranny . The "Federa l Farmer " warned tha t the ne w governmen t woul d creat e a standing arm y tha t woul d serv e a s "a very agreeable plac e of employment fo r th e young gentlemen " who woul d delight i n guttin g th e treasury and servin g tyranny. "Joh n DeWitt " argue d that th e ne w regime would provid e emolument s t o young aristocrats prac ticed i n arm s an d arden t fo r a governmen t "o f force " tha t woul d absor b every othe r authorit y o n th e continent . A ratifie d Constitutio n woul d b e "a hast y strid e t o universa l empir e i n thi s Wester n world , flattering , ver y flattering t o youn g ambitiou s minds , bu t fata l t o th e libertie s o f the peo ple." A n anonymou s Philadelphi a ma n wen t further : h e wa s certai n tha t American aristocrat s alread y ha d usurpe d libert y an d wer e no w tryin g t o formalize thei r power by means of a Constitution tha t was part o f "a deeplaid schem e t o enslav e u s . . . probabl y invente d b y th e Societ y o f th e Cincinnati." 50 Antifederalists also worried that a peacetime standing army would have decent citizen s livin g ami d arme d thugs . "Joh n Humble " calle d th e standin g army a home for "th e purgings of the jails of Great Britain, Ireland, and Ger many." Benjamin Workman argued that the army would recruit "the purgings of European prisons " a s well a s "low ruffians bre d amon g ourselve s who d o not lov e t o work. " Joh n Dawso n state d tha t th e soldiers ' "onl y occupatio n would b e idlenes s [and ] th e introductio n o f vice an d dissipation, " whil e a n "Impartial Examiner " adde d tha t th e officer s woul d forc e soldier s int o "un conditional submission to the commands of superiors," reduce them to "slavery," and make them "fit instruments of tyranny and oppression." Eventually, these "dregs of the people" would return to society to "become extremely burdensome."51 Federalist s di d no t wholly disagree. Alexander Hamilto n advo cated a standing arm y bu t showe d littl e trus t i n it . When h e suggeste d tha t freeholders di d not want to be "dragged from thei r occupations and families " to perfor m th e "disagreeabl e duty " o f mannin g wester n garrisons , h e rein forced th e belief that onl y marginal me n would voluntaril y enlist . When h e argued tha t American s nee d no t fea r th e office r corp s becaus e th e militar y would "be in the hands of the representatives of the people," he lent credence to Whig suspicions that officers wer e corrupt me n who needed external governance.52 The founder s sa w bachelorhood , libertinism , rape , sodomy , itinerancy , pauperism, frontier violence , slave unrest, and military disorder as the crest of a wave of male degenerac y tha t wa s swelled b y mens dail y dealing s i n blas phemy, alcoholism, gambling, prostitution, adultery , fighting, dueling, thiev-

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 7 3

ery, and murder. S o many men seeme d to be "intemperate zealots"; so many men participate d i n "th e mos t shamefu l depredations" ; s o man y me n de manded libert y an d asserte d democrac y onl y t o joi n mob s tha t committe d "indecent outrages"; so many men followed "factiou s demagogues" who beckoned tyranny . The founder s employe d th e gramma r o f manhood t o stigma tize, ridicule, degrade, humiliate, and shame disorderly men to consent to and comply with consensual norms of manhood but , cognizant of men's corruptibility, they also relied on stat e coercion t o control, punish, deter , and possibly reform disorderl y men. 53

State Coercion Death was the prescribed punishmen t fo r mos t serious crimes at the time of the Revolution . However , Enlightenmen t criminolog y considere d th e deat h penalty a relatively poo r deterrent . Cesar e Beccari a explained , "I t i s not th e terrible but fleeting sight of a felon s death which i s the most powerful brak e on crime " but "th e long-drawn-out exampl e of a man deprive d o f freedom. " A male deprive d o f independence, separate d fro m hi s family , an d mad e de pendent o n hi s captors lost not onl y his liberty but als o his manhood. Capi tal punishment, in contrast, gave him an opportunity to redeem his manhood. That happened a t a double hanging where, Benjamin Frankli n reported , on e convict was "extremely dejected" bu t th e other exhibited " a becoming manl y J constancy. "54 The most striking instance of a criminal being executed only to redeem his manhood occurre d whe n Britis h Majo r Joh n Andr e wa s hange d fo r spyin g during the Revolution. Upon his capture, Andre sent to General Washington a letter marke d "wit h a frankness becomin g a gentleman an d ma n o f hono r and principle." He asked to "die as a soldier and man of honor [b y being shot], not a s a crimina l [b y bein g hanged]. " Washington denie d th e reques t bu t praised Andre for exhibiting "that fortitude which was to be expected from a n accomplished ma n an d gallan t officer. " Whe n a teary-eyed servan t brough t him a dres s unifor m fo r th e scaffold , Andr e ordered , "Leav e m e unti l yo u show yourself mor e manly. " When h e was hanged, "th e tea r o f compassio n was drawn from ever y pitying eye that beheld thi s accomplished youth a victim t o th e usage s o f war. " Alexande r Hamilto n wa s on e o f man y notabl e Americans who memorialized Andre for having been "a man of honor" whose final request was that "I die like a brave man." 55 Nearly tw o decade s later , Benjami n Rus h wa s stil l rankle d b y Andr e s

74 I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

celebrity: "The spy was lost in the hero; and indignation everywhere gave way to admiration and praise." Men who saw courage before the gallows as a shortcut to manly dignity had an incentive to commit capital crimes. Furthermore, the "admiration which fortitude unde r suffering excite s has in some instances excited env y [and ] induce d delude d peopl e to feig n o r confess crime s which they had never committed o n purpose to secure to themselves a conspicuous death." Rus h asserte d tha t a proper punishmen t protecte d societ y fro m th e criminal an d dissuade d other s from emulatin g his actions. Following Beccaria, he argued, "The death of a malefactor i s not so efficacious a method of deterring from wickednes s a s the example of continually remainin g . . . a man who is deprived of his liberty." 56 A man deprive d o f liberty suffered a living death o f emasculation, famil y separation, and social isolation. Reformers opposed public punishments (such as cleaning streets and repairing roads) that afforded criminal s an opportunity to see family member s o r engage "crowds of idle boys" in "indecen t an d im proper conversation. " Criminalit y wa s infectious ; i t neede d t o b e quaran tined. Rush supported sending convicts to isolated prisons. He proposed, "Let a large house . .. b e erected in a remote part of the state. Let the avenue to this house b e rendere d difficul t an d gloom y b y mountain s o r morasses . Le t it s doors b e o f iron ; an d le t th e grating , occasione d b y openin g an d shuttin g them, be increased by an echo from a neighboring mountain, that shall extend and continu e a sound tha t shal l deepl y pierc e th e soul. " Within thes e soul piercing prisons, older convicts were to be isolated from younger ones, and the most vicious were to be locked in isolation cells. Rush reasoned that "attach ment t o kindre d an d societ y i s on e o f th e stronges t feeling s i n th e huma n heart" and, therefore, isolatio n from famil y and friends "i s one of the severest punishments that can be inflicted upo n a man." 57 Most founder s agree d tha t isolatio n wa s painful . Jame s Otis , Jr. , calle d "solitude" a n "unnatural " stat e i n whic h me n "perish. " Joh n Dickinso n thought "tha t to be solitary is to be wretched." Thomas Jefferson state d tha t isolation fro m love d ones "is worse than deat h inasmuch a s [death] end s our sufferings wherea s [isolation ] begin s them " an d transform s a ma n int o a "gloomy monk sequestered from th e world." Samuel Quarrier put it best. Petitioning to be released from a debtors jail, he wrote President Jefferson, "Thi s ignominious imprisonment unman s the heart." 58 The belie f tha t isolatio n "unmans " th e hear t mad e imprisonmen t bot h painful an d promising. Isolated men suffered a humiliating loss of manhood. Officials locke d them up and treated them as children. Their sole hope for reclaiming self-respec t an d socia l status wa s t o cooperat e wit h reformer s wh o

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 7 5 urged them t o use solitude to repent , suppress passion, and lear n useful trades . Rush rhapsodize d a t th e prospec t o f a reformed convic t returnin g t o society : "I alread y hea r th e inhabitant s o f ou r village s an d township s . . . runnin g t o meet hi m o n th e da y o f hi s deliverance . Hi s friend s an d famil y bath e hi s cheeks with tear s of joy; and th e universa l shou t o f the neighborhoo d is , 'Thi s our brothe r wa s lost an d i s found—was dead , an d i s alive.'" 59 On e ca n imag ine a similar reactio n b y famil y an d friend s whe n a n apparen t lifelon g bache lor announce d plan s t o marr y a virtuous woman . The founder s als o considere d punishin g disorderl y me n b y banishin g them t o distan t places . Debatin g a ne w stat e constitutio n i n 1783 , a Sout h Carolina write r note d tha t th e mai n proble m wit h banishin g a criminal wa s that othe r state s o r nation s migh t retaliat e an d "cas t forth thei r outlaw s upo n us." This wa s what happene d whe n libertine s wer e banishe d fro m polit e so ciety i n on e villag e onl y t o appea r a t socia l gathering s i n anothe r locale , o r when itinerant s wer e sen t packin g fro m on e tow n t o th e next , o r whe n dis orderly slave s wer e sol d fro m on e plantatio n t o another . Still , banishmen t had bi g benefits . I t remove d th e immediat e danger . I t was a n effectiv e deter rent becaus e i t threatene d t o isolat e me n fro m thei r land , family , an d com munity. Finally , i t afforde d a chanc e fo r rehabilitatio n because , i f a man s character "i s not absolutel y forfeited , h e i s laid unde r a necessity o f behavin g with mor e prudenc e i n anothe r society , les t h e shoul d agai n b e subjecte d t o the inconvenienc e o f a remova l o r t o a les s mil d punishment. " Alexande r Hamilton generall y agreed , arguin g i n 179 4 tha t Whiske y rebel s shoul d "b e compelled b y thei r outlawr y t o abando n thei r property , houses , an d th e United States." 60 The founders ' mos t extensiv e experimen t i n banishin g disorderl y male s was the practic e o f sending regula r troop s t o th e frontier . Fro m th e beginnin g of nationhood, America n legislator s limite d th e numbe r o f regular soldier s i n the standin g army , governe d the m wit h sever e rules , an d sen t the m fa r fro m civilized society . American s exhibite d a lastin g hostilit y t o "militar y institu tions an d th e militar y function " b y refusin g t o suppor t a larg e peacetim e es tablishment. The y distruste d rank-and-fil e soldier s an d subjecte d the m t o drastic discipline , includin g flogging, branding , hanging , an d th e firing squad. Mos t important , the y isolate d soldier s fro m respectabl e societ y b y marching the m t o th e frontier , wher e thei r lus t an d licentiousnes s wer e subli mated int o buildin g road s an d fort s an d keepin g peac e betwee n settler s an d Indians. Hopefully , som e soldier s woul d tak e advantag e o f thei r situatio n t o mature int o manhood , acquir e frontie r land , star t thei r ow n families , an d as sume th e right s an d responsibilitie s o f citizenship. 61

j6 I

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

Marginal Men George Washington wrote a nephew, "You have now arrived to that age when you must qui t th e trifling amusement s o f a boy and assum e the more dignified manners of a man." The Bachelo r and other disorderly men did not qui t the trifling amusements of a boy. They were marginal men who indulged passion, impulse, and avarice to foment disorde r in the ranks of men as well as to seduce innocen t women , patroniz e prostitutes , rap e lower-clas s an d slav e women, commit incest, marry for lust or money, and cheat on wives. Jeremiah Atwater declared , "Ma n i s always prone t o what will center i n himsel f only ; hating restraint o f any sort and considering it, of itself, as an evil; aspiring at domination ove r others ; fon d o f possessin g power , an d pron e t o abus e it . Human natur e appear s i n it s tru e colors , without artificia l disguise , i n chil dren. I t is , in general , very hard t o mak e childre n submi t t o what i s proper. They are self-willed an d extremely apt to rebel. What children are in a family, mankind ar e as subject t o th e restraint s o f law and order." 62 On e reaso n th e founders dispute d emergin g ideal s o f self-made manhoo d wa s tha t the y believed men's self-centered childishnes s and rebelliou s selfishness ha d to be restrained i f they were to assume the more dignified manner s of manhood an d submit voluntarily to the restraints of law and order . The founder s use d th e gramma r o f manhoo d t o encourag e th e Bachelo r and othe r disorderl y me n t o exercis e libert y wit h self-restrain t an d assum e adult responsibilitie s consisten t wit h civi c order . They stigmatize d margina l men as effeminate, slavish , and especially childish creatures who did not merit the rights of men o r the respect of society. This informa l pressur e was generally sufficient t o encourage most young white males to conform t o consensual norms o f manhood. Yout h with libertin e tendencie s coul d achiev e self-mas tery and independence by disciplining their sexuality; single men could mea sure u p t o manhoo d b y marrying, sirin g legitimate children , an d governin g their dependents ; itinerants , vagrants, paupers, backwoodsmen, an d soldier s could refor m themselve s b y acquirin g lan d an d settlin g int o stabl e familie s and communities . The founder s believe d that me n who conforme d t o hegemonic masculinity in order to avoid humiliation an d ear n esteem were likely to comply with legitimate political authority . The founders ' gramma r o f manhood di d no t an d coul d no t motivat e al l males to conform t o hegemonic norms. On th e one hand, som e white males continued t o engag e i n lustfu l deceit , commi t rap e an d sodomy , brutaliz e slaves, provoke conflic t wit h India n peoples , an d commi t othe r crime s an d outrages that fostered conflict s i n society. On th e other hand, white prejudic e

The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men I 77 precluded blac k an d India n me n fro m manhood , an d forma l law s exclude d them fro m citizenship . The founder s spok e as if all of these marginal me n suf fered a case of male immaturity; the y were grown childre n i n need o f guidanc e and governance . Thi s wa s th e discursiv e contex t i n whic h th e founder s in voked hegemoni c norm s o f manhoo d t o legitimiz e discretionar y us e o f stat e coercion, i n order to control an d disciplin e mens childis h conduc t an d t o pro mote thei r reformatio n an d maturation . Magistrate s coul d refus e t o ac t whe n the victim was a greedy old bachelor , o r the y could enforc e breach-of-promis e laws to punis h libertin e treachery . Ultimately , the y could impriso n disorderl y men wh o exhibite d wha t "Amicu s Republicae " calle d a "licentiou s disposi tion" tha t invite d "tumult s an d insurrections." 63 The gramma r o f manhoo d containe d a n idio m o f childishnes s tha t man y founders use d t o criticize , stigmatize , an d penaliz e wha t Washingto n de scribed a s "unmanl y behavior " i n "refractor y individuals. " Fo r example , George Roger s Clar k trie d t o win ove r Britain' s allie s by persuading the m tha t the Englis h "ar e n o me n . . . and ar e becom e lik e children, " whil e Alexande r Hamilton emphasize d Genera l Charle s Lee' s misconduc t a t th e Battl e o f Monmouth b y labeling his act s "trul y childish." Leader s debatin g th e Consti tution employe d th e same idiom. Davi d Ramsa y dismissed stat e constitution s as "hastil y institute d b y young politicians, " an d Edmun d Randolp h though t them "to o youthful t o have acquired stability. " Simeon Baldwi n wanted t o lo p off "th e libertinis m o f juvenil e independence " manifeste d i n th e Article s o f Confederation. Federalist s the n appropriate d maturit y fo r th e ne w govern ment. Tench Cox e applaude d th e requiremen t tha t th e presiden t b e "mature d by years of experience." Also, he was pleased tha t "n o ambitious, undeserving , or unexperience d youth " coul d acquir e a seat i n th e Hous e unti l "thirt y year s have ripened hi s abilities." For "Civi c Rusticus," that rul e ensured th e electio n of men "pas t 'th e heyday o f the blood, ' weane d fro m th e intoxicatin g dissipa tion o f youth an d th e ho t allurement s o f pleasure. " Similarly , Noa h Webste r portrayed th e Senat e a s a place fo r me n "venerabl e fo r ag e and respectability " and fre e fro m "th e bia s o f passions tha t gover n th e young. " Antifederalists re sponded i n kind, claimin g that thei r opponent s were guilty of launching "pro jects of young ambition." Ratificatio n debater s regularl y accused each other o f throwing "fit s o f passion " tha t wer e "perfectl y boyish, " makin g "childis h ar guments," behavin g lik e "disgrace d schoo l boys, " "childre n i n th e market place," an d "childre n makin g bubbles, " o r simpl y "act[ing ] lik e children." 64 The idio m o f childishness identifie d a subterranean leve l of manhood. Th e founders portraye d th e Bachelo r an d othe r disorderl y me n a s immature , childish minor s wh o disregarde d o r denie d consensua l norm s o f manhood .

yS I The Bachelor and Other Disorderly Men

They were males who did not aspire to or achieve manly independence, fam ily continuity , an d patriarcha l governance . Instead , the y wer e itinerant s i n time and space, who fit in nowhere and deserved to be distrusted everywhere. They wer e destroyers , no t procreators . They congregate d i n th e democrati c mobs tha t elevate d passio n ove r virtue an d the y filled the rank s o f libertin e suitors wh o manipulated , deceived , an d abuse d wome n rathe r tha n loved , governed, and protected them. They were the Other—what young males had to outgrow to gain respectability as family men and to attain civic standing as citizens.

4 The Family Man an d Citizenshi p

In a 1612 essay titled "Of Marriage and Single Life," Francis Bacon argued that families were an "impediment" to mens greatness. Wives and children distracted me n fro m publi c affairs an d made them reticen t to take risks essential t o performing grea t deeds . That wa s why "th e best works . . . have proceeded from th e unmarried or childless men which, both in affection an d means, hav e marrie d an d endowe d th e public. " However , famil y me n wer e notable for one crucial virtue. They were husbands and fathers who exhibited "the greatest care of future times , unto which the y know they must transmi t their greatest pledges."1 The American founders urge d some men to greatness. However, given fears of democratic disorder, they used the grammar of manhood to encourage most men to devote themselves to family life. They agreed with Baco n tha t marriag e catalyze d cautio n an d motivate d youn g male s t o mature into sober, orderly adults responsible for protectin g and provisionin g dependents. A common cur e for male license was a marriage license. The founder s generall y agreed tha t th e Bachelo r s tendency towar d licen tiousness intensifie d America s democrati c distempe r an d invite d me n t o abuse women. They also agreed that the single young man should be encouraged to resis t the Bachelo r within b y settling a piece of land an d marryin g a respectable woman t o share affection, carr y his seed, nurture his infants, an d contribute to his estate. He thereby assumed responsibility for family protection, productivity , an d posterity ; exchange d self-interes t fo r famil y interest ; and sacrifice d persona l pleasur e t o provid e propert y an d patrimon y fo r hi s heirs, educate them in "the moral character of the man" an d prepare them to perpetuate th e family dynasty. 2 The founder s dre w on th e grammar o f manhood to endorse enthusiastically the Family Man who honored his debt to ancestors, fixed a respectable place for himself in the community, and developed a dynastic stake in the future . The Famil y Mans presumptiv e caution , maturity , responsibility , sobriety , and orderl y conduct legitimize d hi s power ove r women an d earne d hi m re publican citizenship. A worthy man committed himself to protect rather than

79

8o I The Family Man and Citizenship

persecute women. A proper husband and father wielded patriarchal authorit y in private and public life to govern female dependents for their own good and to defend his family and community from dangers that included women's disorderly conduc t an d men s licentiou s behavior . Patriarcha l protectio n wa s preferable to persecution, though it still amounted to a protection racket. Furthermore, the Family Man s concern for the future suggeste d that he could exercise liberty with restrain t an d participat e i n politic s wit h moderation . H e was not apt to indulge passion or act on impulse lest he imperil his dependents and family dynasty. Many founders fel t that the Family Mans sense of self-restraint an d carin g fo r posterit y qualifie d hi m a s a trustworthy ma n an d de serving citizen.

Better Than Bachelorhood Young America n male s ponderin g marriag e coul d anticipat e fou r benefit s from it . Th e first wa s lov e an d happiness . A seventeen-year-ol d Alexande r Hamilton rhapsodized , "Believ e me , lov e is doubly swee t i n wedlock' s hol y bands." He later described marriage as "a state which with a kind of magnetic force attract s every breast to it in which sensibilit y has a place," though "th e dull admonition s o f prudence" migh t temp t youn g me n t o resis t it . Ideally , the tensio n wa s resolve d i n favo r o f sensibilit y ove r prudenc e b y a virtuous woman. Hamilton explaine d that his betrothed, Elizabeth Schuyler, was such a woman: "Th e mos t determine d adversarie s o f Hyme n ca n find i n he r n o pretext fo r thei r hostility , an d ther e ar e severa l o f my friends , philosopher s who railed at love as a weakness, men of the world who laughed at it as a fantasy, whom sh e has presumptuously an d daringl y compelled t o acknowledg e its power and surrender at discretion." 3 Hamilton echoed the emerging belief that men could achieve true happiness only in companionate marriages. What wa s the relationshi p betwee n men' s happines s an d marriage ? Con temporary writers believe d tha t th e fiery passions that drov e many men int o marriage ideall y gav e way t o feeling s o f benevolenc e an d friendshi p withi n marriage. Judith Sargent Murray prescribed that a young man "tranquilize his deportment" and show "a dignified and manly manifestation o f tenderness" as he anticipated his nuptials, and then exhibit manly moderation an d mildness when he became a husband. His betrothed and then wife was to use all means at her disposal to inspire in him rectitude. Alice Izard asserted that a good wife "guides where sh e does no t govern " an d lead s her husban d "t o worthy pur suits." Furthermore, a married man coul d expect to achieve a sense of mean-

The Family Man and Citizenship I 8 1

ing an d immortalit y b y sirin g legitimat e heirs . On e America n magazin e quoted John Milton: "In the existence of a married man, there is no termination." An anonymous poet added tha t wives suffered a "loss of freedom" bu t were compensated by husbands' love and by being "renew'd immortal in a filial race." The model republican family was constituted by a husband and wife who fostered benevolence and friendship, mad e a joint commitment t o righteousness an d virtue , an d experience d a reassuring sens e of intergenerationa l continuity that contributed t o their enduring happiness. 4 Second, marriage was an opportunity fo r a young male to prove his manhood by governing a woman. The challenge was to ply a narrow pathway between th e Bachelor s slaver y to passion an d a husbands potentia l subordina tion to his wife. Initially, a young husband was expected to demonstrate manly self-discipline b y giving up promiscuity , itinerancy , drinking , gambling , an d other selfis h vice s associated with hi s bachelor years. Next, h e was to exhibi t manly merit b y achieving famil y mastery . Georg e Washington hinte d a t th e difficulty whe n congratulating Marquis de Chastellux on his marriage: "I can hardly refrain fro m smilin g to find that you are caught a t last [by ] that terri ble contagion, domestic felicity." Washington's mirth mirrored a general sense that ne w husbands wer e easil y enslaved b y love and subordinate d b y domi neering wives . What wa s a youn g husban d t o do ? Benjami n Franklin an nounced, "An y man tha t i s really a man i s master of his own family. " Manl y mastery mean t wieldin g authorit y withou t tyranny . A "ma n tha t reall y i s a man" restrained his wife's lust lest her adulterous behavior undermine his family dynasty; controlled he r profligacy les t it destroy his estate; and monitore d her intemperance and negligence lest she had "no longer that prudent care for their famil y t o manag e well th e busines s o f their statio n no r tha t regar d fo r reputation which good women ough t to have." Law and custom supported a husband's dominio n ove r disorderly wives, but i t was a man's own abilit y t o govern effectivel y withou t becomin g a "he-tyrant"—t o rul e firmly bu t lov ingly—that enabled him to sustain conjugal affectio n an d win other men's respect.5 One guidebook identified " a wise husband" a s one who "by knowing how to be a master" did not let his wife "feel the weight of it" because his "authority is tempered by his kindness" along with his tenderness and esteem. Several writers suggeste d tha t a truly masterfu l husban d coul d cemen t hi s authorit y by choosing an educated woman fo r a wife or by allowing his wife to be educated. Judith Sargent Murray explained that men benefited from marryin g educated women who possessed "invigorated" judgments that prevented "an unhappy Hymen. " Mar y Fish Noyes dre w up a "Portrait o f a Good Husband "

82 I The Family Man and Citizenship

that praise d th e spouse who gratifie d hi s wife's "reasonabl e inclinations, " especially he r desir e t o rea d book s "fo r [her ] perusa l an d improvement. " A n anonymous poetess instructed men , "Be generous then, and us to knowledge lead / And happines s t o you will sure succeed / Then sacre d Hymen shal l in triumph reign / And all be proud to wear the pleasing chain."6 The traditional patriarch ruled by virtue of near absolute authority, but modern norm s of republican manhoo d indicate d tha t mal e dominio n coul d b e fortifie d i f me n practiced a hegemonic masculinity that mostly relied on kindness, consideration, and respect to win a wife's consent to her own subordination . Third, marriage was the primary means by which young men matured into adult responsibilities . Benjami n Franklin announce d tha t marriag e was "th e cause of all good order i n the world and what alone preserves it from th e ut most confusion. " A young man "coul d neve r thrive" until married . Then h e became "mor e firmly settled. " H e minde d hi s "busines s bette r an d mor e steadily" an d wa s "soone r truste d . . . than i f he i s single." Hi s sens e o f responsibility an d hi s industr y were augmented b y a "good an d faithfu l help mate" wh o kep t hi s house , assiste d i n hi s business , bor e hi s children , an d helped transmi t hi s estate to them . Franklin tol d thi s stor y about a printers patrimony: "O n hi s decease , the business was continued b y the widow who [was] born and bred in Holland, where . . . the knowledge of accompts makes part of the female education. " Concerned abou t family welfare, many American men agree d that women shoul d be educated t o contribute t o family en terprises, protect family estates from "craft y men" who preyed on widows, and maintain famil y businesse s "ti l a son is grown up , fit to undertake an d go on with it, to the lasting advantage and enriching of the family." 7 Marriage challenged me n t o assum e adul t responsibilit y fo r managin g a family econom y and dependents, and planning for futur e contingencies , including death an d dynastic longevity. The fourth anticipate d benefit was that marriage gave men a familial stake in the community. A married man had a family to provision and protect and, therefore, a family interes t to join with neighbor s in mutual-aid project s tha t promoted famil y prosperit y an d i n militar y venture s agains t enemie s wh o threatened famil y welfare. Sila s Downer urged communa l protes t i n 1768 by appealing to family interes t when warning that Britis h effort s t o quarter soldiers in colonists' homes would result in redcoats taking "absolute comman d of our families. " Thomas Jefferson hope d t o strengthe n patrio t solidarit y i n 1774 by invoking family interest to criticize British attempts to have colonists stand trial in England: "Who are to feed the wife and children whom he leaves behind and who have had no other subsistence but his daily labor?" American

The Family Man and Citizenship I 8 3 leaders idealized citizen-soldier s a s husbands an d father s who fough t "fo r thei r wives, thei r children , thei r liberty , an d thei r all " i n orde r t o motivat e me n t o participate i n community-base d militi a units . They als o demonize d th e Eng lish aristocrac y b y exploiting fear s tha t th e enem y was targetin g patriots ' fam ilies as well as their liberties . Georg e Washington reacte d t o a 1775 rumor tha t Virginias governo r wa s goin g t o arres t hi s wife , Martha , b y declaring , " I ca n hardly thin k tha t Lor d Dunmor e ca n ac t s o lo w an d unmanl y a par t a s t o think of seizing Mrs. Washington bywa y o f revenge upon me." 8 The founder s condemned th e Bachelor s selfishness , bu t the y condone d th e Famil y Man s self-interested effor t t o feed , shelter , an d defen d hi s famil y a s a significan t source o f patriotic cohesio n an d communit y good . Young men wh o understoo d tha t famil y loyalty , governance, an d responsi bility wer e th e basi s fo r happiness , manhood , adulthood , an d communit y membership di d no t necessaril y achiev e thes e goals . Many yout h faile d t o re strain lus t lon g enoug h t o choos e a prope r spouse . "I n th e compositio n o f human nature, " Washingto n warned , "ther e i s a goo d dea l o f inflammabl e matter [and ] whe n th e torc h i s put t o it , tha t whic h i s within ma y burs t int o blaze." Eve n self-discipline d male s wer e easil y dazzle d b y th e brillianc e o f fe male "beauty " an d blinde d t o th e "virtue " tha t "fade s no t i n sevent y years. " The founder s counsele d youn g me n t o choos e virtu e ove r beaut y bu t Joh n Adams complicate d th e choic e b y observin g tha t a beautifu l wif e coul d b e a family asset . Franklin s descriptio n o f Moravia n marriag e custom s intimate d that mos t matche s wer e serendipitous : As these elders of both sexes were well acquainted with tempers and dispositions of their respective pupils, they could best judge what matches were suitable, and their judgments were generally acquiesced in. But if, for example, it should happen tha t tw o o r thre e young women wer e found t o b e equally proper fo r th e young man , th e lo t wa s then recurre d to . I objected , "I f th e matche s ar e no t made b y mutual choic e o f the partners, som e o f them ma y chance t o b e very unhappy." "An d s o the y may, " answere d m y informer , "i f you le t th e partie s choose for themselves"—which, indeed , I could not deny. 9 Questions abou t th e essentia l ingredient s fo r happ y marriage s plu s awarenes s of youn g peopl e s growin g freedo m t o choos e thei r ow n mate s prompte d Thomas Jefferso n t o sugges t tha t marriag e an d procreatio n ha d becom e mat ters o f "fortuitou s concourse. " Nevertheless, most founders wer e convinced tha t fortuitou s marriage s were better tha n bachelorhood . Joe l Barlo w wante d t o reduc e th e lega l ag e o f ma jority t o induc e youn g me n int o "earl y marriage s [to ] encourag e purit y o f

84 I The Family Man and Citizenship

morals." Samuel Williams applauded "th e wishes of parents to see their children settled" into early marriages and set in "the way of virtue, reputation, and felicity." Simultaneously, law and custom opposed the practice of ending bad marriages. Divorces were difficult an d rare . Noah Webster's reaction t o revolutionary France' s liberal divorce laws explains why. He condemne d "th e decree o f th e Conventio n authorizin g divorce s upo n th e applicatio n o f eithe r party, alleging only unsuitableness of temper," as a manifestation o f "the little regard in which the morals of the nation are held" and as an invitation "t o infidelity and domestic broils." 10 Marriage had to be sanctified i f it was to settle down young men, coax them into responsibility, and stabilize society. William Byrd recalled, "The Spartans had so much regard for marriage that they enacted a law by which they condemned al l old bachelors above the age of 2 4 t o b e whippe d publicly. " Th e founders ' Spartanlik e commitmen t t o marriage was based on their hopes for human happiness and their fears of the Bachelor's "licentiousness " assumin g "th e sacred nam e o f liberty." Stephani e Coontz detects an early American consensu s that "individua l right s did have limits and that the family was the natural place to establish them." Public notification o f an impending marriage was an affirmation tha t a young man had volunteered t o exchange licentious individualism fo r th e Family Man's devotion t o durabl e happiness , famil y responsibility , an d th e communit y good . The betrothe d mal e promised t o ac t like a mature adul t an d thereb y earne d what "A n Impartial Citizen " called "a man's reputation" to enjoy an d pass on as part of his legacy to posterity. 11

Provisioning Posterity The Family Man's highest duty was to procreate and provision posterity. John Demos observes, "All adult men [were ] expected to become fathers." Marriage was the onl y legitimate outle t fo r sex , and se x resulted i n procreation . Mos t men aspire d t o legitimate fatherhood . Mar y Bet h Norto n notes , "Childless ness indicated a husband's failing s a s a man," whereas fatherhood atteste d t o his manhood. Jay Fliegelman adds that fathers hoped to be "immortalized" in their children. The ques t for symboli c immortality prompted father s t o provide for children' s curren t an d futur e need s by accumulating an d disbursin g property and patrimony to enable sons to perpetuate the family line. Providing fo r posterit y i n a n er a o f uncertai n economi c chang e wa s particularl y tough. Georg e Mason though t tha t eve n wealthy fathers coul d n o longer b e confident tha t their sons would be able to sustain family prosperity: "However

The Family Man and Citizenship I 8 5

affluent thei r circumstance s o r elevated thei r situation s migh t be , the cours e of a few years no t onl y migh t bu t certainl y would distribut e thei r posterit y throughout th e lower classes."12 The Family Mans economi c strategy was to accumulate a sufficient i f not substantial estate . He labored, invested , an d sacrificed t o amass real and per sonal property that h e could distribut e an d bequeat h t o his children. To this end, h e might speculat e i n frontie r property . Maso n explaine d t o Georg e Jr. that he spent one thousand pounds to acquire western lands because "they will in twent y years be worth fort y o r fifty thousand pound s t o m y family." Th e larger a man's estate, the better the chance that his heirs would be able to preserve it, cushion the impact of adverse economic forces, and take advantage of new opportunities. Artisan fathers practiced a variation on this theme. Scholars sugges t tha t artisan s aspire d t o a "comfortabl e existence " b y devotin g themselves to building craft skill s and small shops. They identified thei r skills with "manly competence" and used control of apprenticeships to convert their skills into "a form o f property" that they passed on to sons. Overall, the Family Man's economi c interes t wa s mor e a matter o f paterna l aggrandizemen t than possessive individualism although, in the late eighteenth century, famil y loyalties increasingly commingled with an emerging capitalist mentality. 13 How shoul d th e Famil y Ma n distribut e hi s estat e t o hi s children ? Man y founders opposed primogeniture on principled grounds. It was unjust fo r fa thers t o favor oldes t sons . Thomas Pain e wrote, "B y the aristocratical la w of primogeniture, i n a family of six children, five are exposed. Aristocracy never has mor e tha n on e child . The res t ar e begotte n t o b e devoured." Privilege d older sons "begin lif e by trampling on al l their younger brothers an d sisters" while younger sons , "b y aristocracy, ar e bastards an d orphans. " Thomas Jefferson added that primogeniture fostered a "brutality" borne of vast economic inequalities an d clas s conflict. Fo r him, "legislator s canno t inven t to o man y devices for subdividin g property" and distributin g i t among "all the childre n or to all the brothers an d sisters or other relation s in equal degree." 14 Primogeniture robbed posterity of liberty and equality. Most founders considere d relatively equal distributions of family propert y useful fo r perpetuatin g famil y dynasties . They agree d tha t father s wante d t o accumulate sufficien t patrimon y t o mak e thei r childre n "foreve r indepen dent." Still , they criticized older sons who received huge inheritances only to become spoile d yout h wh o indulge d vic e an d squandere d famil y fortunes . The founder s reserve d thei r highes t accolade s fo r youn g me n wh o receive d modest famil y share s an d the n demonstrate d persona l meri t b y cultivatin g manly virtue s an d talent s advantageou s t o economi c productivity . Writer s

86 I The Family Man and Citizenship

used Benjamin Frankli n (th e youngest so n of a youngest so n for five generations) as an "illustriou s example " of the "self-mad e man " who transforme d a meager family legacy into a substantial estate. Nathanael Emmons instructe d young American s t o emulat e Frankli n an d "sho w yourselve s men. " Davi d Ramsay honored the "self-made, industrious men" who "laid a foundation fo r establishing persona l independence, " an d wh o als o wer e "successfull y em ployed i n establishin g tha t o f thei r country." 15 Significantly , thi s nascen t image o f self-made manhoo d wa s situate d i n a familial context . I t depicte d young me n wh o inherite d famil y wealt h an d merite d additiona l prosperity ; and it recognized accumulated wealth as a means to establish, support, stew ard, promote, and perpetuate family estates. Ironically, th e founders ' suppor t fo r equitabl e famil y distribution s mad e great fortune s see m saf e fo r th e Republic . Charle s Coteswort h Pinckne y ar gued that egalitarian inheritance laws would encourage a natural, periodic redistribution of wealth. Once instituted, "we may suppose that in the future a n equal division of property among the children will in general take place in all the states." This suppositio n ha d tw o implications . On e wa s that me n wh o owned huge estates probably deserved them becaus e they likely accumulated most of their assets by dint of their own effort an d merit. The other implica tion was that me n who had immens e holdings pose d n o grea t danger t o th e community becaus e the y di d no t transmi t intac t riche s fro m generatio n t o generation. Their wealth was safe because it would be subdivided amon g numerous heirs. 16 This reasonin g helpe d legitimiz e a n economi c aristocrac y o f virtuous, talented , manl y heir s abl e t o metamorphos e modes t patrimonie s into magnificent famil y fortunes . Where did fathers find manly heirs? Jefferson wanted the pool to be as large as possible. He supported a n equal distribution o f family wealth to create "an opening for th e aristocracy of virtue and talent " among traditionally dispossessed younge r sons . H e als o argue d tha t "female s shal l hav e equa l [inheri tance] right s with males." That way, fathers coul d seek an opening for virtue and talen t amon g thei r sons-in-law—wh o ha d lega l contro l o f thei r wives ' wealth. Benjami n Franklin argued tha t a dynasti c diversificatio n strateg y made sense during time s of uncertainty. A man shoul d "rais e a large family " with many sons and launch each boy into manhood with a modest stake. That way, regardless of "contrary winds, hidden shoals, storms, and enemies," there was a good chanc e that a t least one son would "retur n with success " enough to perpetuate th e family dynasty. 17 Many fathers ha d no property or patrimony to pass on to sons, and man y young men cam e of age and marrie d havin g received no famil y wealth. Fe w

The Family Man and Citizenship I 8 7

American writers saw poverty as an impenetrable barrier to family prosperit y and socia l stability . William Bradfor d argue d that , i n Europe , th e impover ished "wretch " ha d littl e chanc e t o transfor m hi s labo r int o a family estate . With no alternatives, he often engage d in disorderly and criminal conduct t o support his family and better his children's prospects. But poverty was differ ent in America, where "every man is or may be a proprietor" and his "labor is bountifully rewarded. " Eve n Americas poores t father s an d son s could inves t individual effort i n economic opportunity to build family estates and even accumulate substantia l patrimon y fo r th e nex t generation . Joh n Adam s sug gested that the realistic prospect of family aggrandizement in America helped defuse disconten t amon g "th e idle , th e vicious , th e intemperate. " Rober t Coram adde d tha t universa l publi c educatio n woul d furthe r enlarg e men s economic prospects and secure even greater social harmony. 18 The Famil y Mans effort s t o provisio n hi s famil y an d see k prosperity fo r posterity encourage d hi m t o cultivat e "fre e an d manl y habits " conducive t o family accumulation. His industry and thrift enable d him to feel "the dignity of human nature" and share in the productivity and mobility that contribute d to social order. Whether h e inherited grea t wealth o r no wealth, h e "showe d himself a man" by engaging in paternal aggrandizement to support his family and perpetuat e hi s famil y line . The cautiou s Famil y Man wa s n o Baconia n hero striving after greatness but, Noah Webster proclaimed, he deserved to be ranked amon g "th e laborious an d saving " who were "generall y th e bes t citiJ zens."19

Educating Posterity The young Benjamin Franklin left home and journeyed hundreds of miles to establish his own business and family. The lines of kinship in his family were distended an d frayed, bu t the y did no t snap . The age d Franklin approvingl y recalled hi s father : "Hi s grea t excellenc e wa s a soun d understandin g an d a solid judgment in prudential matters ..... H e turned our attention to what was good, just, and prudent in the conduct of life." Franklin saw a good father as an exemplar and teache r o f "prudence" and "temperance " along with virtue s such a s order , frugality , industry , sincerity , justice , moderation , cleanliness , tranquillity, chastity , an d humility. 20 H e taugh t hi s son s t o exce l i n manl y virtues that were essential to perpetuating the family dynasty. Republican ideals enjoined a father t o govern his sons in the same way that a husband governed his wife. Melvin Yazawa explains that he had to strike "a

88 I The Family Man and Citizenship

balance between love and authority" to build a relationship of "affection an d duty, affection energizin g duty, duty controlling affection." Thomas Jefferso n applauded "affectionat e deportmen t betwee n father an d son" as a foundatio n for teaching "correct conduct." A wise father appeale d to his sons' innate sensibilities ("prid e of character, laudable ambitions, and moral dispositions") as "correctives" to youthful "indiscretions. " When these correctives failed, the father withdrew affection an d used shame to discipline children. Mild measures had " a happier effec t o n futur e characte r tha n th e degrading motive of fear." Nevertheless, mos t founder s di d no t restric t paterna l rul e to mildness . They saw "discretion" as "the soul of'fatherly administration. " John Dickinson advocated the "mild features of patriarchal government" but admitted the occasional utility of coercion. "Plough Jogger" argued that a "father . . . may prefer mildness in his family," but "necessity obliges him sometimes to use rigorous measures. " Pete r Thache r conclude d tha t th e bes t guid e t o paterna l governance was actual results: did sons learn "judgment an d discipline . .. t o check their effervescences" eve n after the y left thei r father's home? 21 Paternal lesson s i n judgment an d disciplin e were t o eliminat e th e Bachelor's vices from boys ' behavioral repertoire. John Adams taught his sons to reject libertine "vanities , levities, and fopperies " an d instea d t o practice "great , manly, an d warlike virtues." He relie d o n Abigail's assistanc e an d instructe d her, "Trai n the m t o virtue . Habituat e the m t o industry , activity , an d spirit . Make them conside r ever y vice as shameful an d unmanly. " The Adams boys were t o becom e "grea t an d manly. " Father s wh o taugh t manl y sham e an d pride expected severa l payoffs. Jefferson believe d they would experienc e "th e most sublime comforts i n every moment of life and in the moment o f death" because fathers' immortality hinged on sons' manly excellence. At times, Sally Mason reports , th e deepes t famil y feeling s shifte d fro m affectio n "betwee n husband and wife" to bonding "between son and father." Americans expected this mal e bonding t o produc e a n intergenerationa l friendship . Accordin g t o Jay Fliegelman, th e father would b e "revered long into his child's adulthood " and his adult son would be "loved long after he has left home." 22 The ideal father-son friendship transcende d intergenerational time and continental space. The founding generatio n enjoined father s t o make necessary sacrifices fo r their sons' good breeding and their families' future prospects. Nathanael Emmons calle d o n father s t o elevat e thei r mora l word s an d deed s i n orde r t o serve as proper model s fo r boys : "Let th e dignit y o f man appea r i n al l your conduct, and especially in your conduct towards your children. Let them see the dignit y o f human natur e exemplified . . . . Take heed tha t non e o f your words, non e o f your actions , non e o f your pursuit s b e unworth y o f men. "

The Family Man and Citizenship I 8 9 Likewise, Emmon s expecte d son s t o giv e u p licentiousnes s t o ear n thei r fa thers' respect . H e instructe d youn g men : "Fle e youthfu l lust s whic h wa r against bot h th e bod y an d th e mind . Shu n tha t all-devourin g monster , in temperance, b y whic h s o man y stron g mind s hav e bee n cas t dow n an d de stroyed. Avoi d ba d compan y an d unmanl y diversion s whic h ar e a n inle t t o every vice. Hold stead y contempt fo r beau s an d fops , thos e butterflie s whic h live upo n th e filth an d dreg s o f th e earth." 23 Bot h father s an d son s wer e t o cast aside their egos in order t o measure u p t o mutual expectation s an d manl y aspirations. Nature an d nurtur e fortifie d th e father-so n bond . Jefferso n wrote , "Expe rience prove s tha t th e mora l an d physica l qualitie s o f man , whethe r goo d o r evil, are transmissibl e fro m fathe r t o son. " A goo d fathe r migh t sir e bas e son s but h e was more ap t t o produc e virtuou s ones . Adams agree d tha t "Wis e me n beget fools , an d hones t me n knaves ; but thes e instance s . . . ar e not general . I f there i s often a likeness i n figure an d feature , ther e i s generally mor e i n min d and heart." Most founder s though t tha t fathers transmitte d virtue s and talent s to sons . Thus , whe n a fathe r achieve d a n esteeme d reputation , peopl e pre sumed tha t hi s son s woul d ear n an d meri t th e sam e respect . Th e resul t wa s that a n eminen t man' s so n was likely to find tha t othe r me n wer e predispose d "to honor th e memory o f his father, t o congratulate him a s the successor t o hi s estate, an d frequentl y t o complimen t hi m wit h election s t o th e office s h e held." What Adam s calle d "th e family spirit " denote d a thick father-so n bon d that supporte d th e transfe r o f manl y virtue , reputation , standing , an d eve n political powe r fro m on e generatio n t o th e next. 24 The founder s reinforce d intergenerationa l bondin g when honorin g father s by favorin g thei r sons . Learnin g Congres s ha d authorize d Jefferso n an d him self t o appoin t America n consul s i n Europe , Adam s recommende d Winslo w Warren i n familia l terms : Otis his grandfather, th e famous James his uncle, his other uncles , and his fa ther have been to my knowledge . . . among the firmest and steadiest support ers of th e American cause . I declare , I don' t believ e ther e i s one famil y upo n earth t o whic h th e Unite d State s ar e so muc h indebte d fo r thei r preservatio n from thralldom . There was scarcely any family in New England [that ] had such prospects of opulence and power under the royal government. They have sacrificed all of them. It is true, and I know you act upon th e maxim that the public good alone is the criterion, but it is equally true that the public good requires that such conspicuous an d exemplar y services and sacrifice s shoul d no t b e neglected, and therefore consideration s of this sort ever did and ever will and ever ought in some degree to influence mankind .

90 I The Family Man and Citizenship

Jefferson mostl y agreed that deserving men's sons should be rewarded. He responded, " I think with you too that i t is for th e public interest t o encourag e sacrifices an d services by rewarding them, and they should weigh to a certain point in the decision between candidates." 25 This intergenerational reward system was manifested i n the practice of providing notabl e men s son s wit h letter s o f introduction . Georg e Maso n sen t Patrick Henry his sons "thanks for the testimonial you were so kind to give him under th e Sea l of the Commonwealth . I t has been o f great service in recom mending him to the notice of many gentlemen of rank and fortune." These letters usuall y highlighted bot h famil y standin g an d individua l merit . Jefferso n introduced Mr. Lyons to Adams as a "son of one of our judges" and "a sensible worthy young physician." H e recommende d Mr . Rutledg e b y writing, "You r knowledge of his father will introduce him to your notice. He merits it moreover on hi s own account." 26 A good fathe r exemplifie d manl y virtues, transmitted a respected famil y name , an d provide d appropriat e connections ; ulti mately, however, each young man would be judged "on his own account. " Among the most important lessons a father taugh t his sons was how to be judged positively . That require d lesson s in "civility. " Franklin explaine d tha t good breeding involved "searching for an d seizing every opportunity to serve and oblige." He "mad e it a rule to forbear al l direct contradiction t o the sentiments of others and all positive assertion of my own." That made him a more pleasant companion , procure d him a ready listening audience, and increase d the likelihood that he would prevail in disagreements. Conversely, "He that is displeased with your words o r actions commonl y joins agains t you. . . . You have enemie s enoug h b y th e commo n cours e o f huma n nature. " Franklin s Junto was organized around civility. It consisted of young men who sought to establish reputations for "character and credit" and increase their "influence in public affairs."27 Jefferson applaude d Franklins advice and added that civility, politeness, mild flattery, and the sacrifice of small pleasures gratified an d conciliated othe r men . H e emphasize d "goo d humor a s one o f the preservative s of our peace and tranquillity " an d state d tha t ingratiatin g onesel f with com panions was a cheap price for "th e good will of another." A young man wh o cultivated "unaffecte d modest y and suavity of manners" would be "endeared" to polite society. Jefferson opposed sending youths to Europe, for fea r of sexual corruption, but he did "wish my countrymen to adopt just so much of European politeness as to be ready to make all those little sacrifices of self which really rende r Europea n manner s amiabl e an d reliev e societ y fro m th e dis agreeable scene s t o whic h rudenes s ofte n subject s it." 28 Where impassione d men claimed individual liberty, manly civility contributed to social harmony.

The Family Man and Citizenship I 9 1 George Washingto n epitomize d manl y civility . At ag e nine , h e copie d n o "Rules o f Civilit y an d Decen t Behavio r i n Compan y an d Conversation " t o help balanc e "tha t littl e spar k o f celestia l fire calle d conscience " wit h respec t for othe r peopl e in society . He note d tha t civilit y enabled a young mal e to de velop a reputatio n fo r bein g "manful , no t sinful, " an d h e trie d t o buil d an d maintain suc h a manly reputatio n throughou t hi s life . As a soldier, h e hope d to wal k "i n suc h a lin e a s wil l giv e th e mos t genera l satisfaction. " I n hi s farewell order s t o th e Continenta l army , h e challenge d demobilizin g soldier s to d o th e same : All the troops . . . should carr y into civi l society the most conciliatin g dispositions; and . . . they should prove themselves not less virtuous and useful a s citizens than they have been persevering and victorious as soldiers.... The private virtues of economy, prudence, and industry will not be less amiable in civil life than th e more splendid qualitie s of valor, perseverance, and enterprise were in the field. Everyone may rest assured that much, very much of the future happi ness o f th e officer s an d me n wil l depen d upo n th e wis e an d manl y conduc t which shall be adopted by them when the y are mingled with the great body of the community. 29 Twenty year s later , Merc y Oti s Warre n remembere d Washingto n fo r havin g exhibited " a certain dignit y unite d wit h th e appearanc e o f good humor." 3 0 A responsibl e fathe r wh o combine d lov e an d discipline , transmitte d an d taught manl y virtues , secure d a respected famil y nam e an d usefu l socia l con nections, and fostered i n his sons a habit of civility afforded the m maxima l op portunity t o becom e trustworth y an d truste d member s o f society . Still , th e Family Man s effort s t o provid e patrimony , encourag e filia l merit , an d secur e social respect fo r hi s heirs were all for naugh t unles s he also protected hi s fam ily, encourage d hi s son s t o participat e i n famil y defense , an d free d the m t o merit manhoo d an d gro w independen t branche s o f the famil y tree .

Protecting Posterity Responsible father s protecte d thei r posterity . I n 1776 , Thomas Pain e pushe d patriotism agains t overwhelming odd s b y reminding colonist s tha t thei r caus e was no t "th e concer n o f a day, a year, o r a n age " but tha t "posterit y ar e virtu ally involve d i n th e contest. " A decad e later , a n "Office r o f th e Lat e Conti nental Army " rallie d voter s agains t th e U.S . Constitutio n b y warning father s to ac t "like men, lik e freemen an d Americans, to transmit unimpaire d t o you r

92 I The Family Man and Citizenship

latest posterity those rights, those liberties, which have ever been so dear." The Family Man who protected his posterity exhibited manhood, earned personal honor, and deserved social esteem. He alone could "take his child by the hand and bless it without feeling the conscious shame of neglecting a parent's duty" because he alone secure d hi s "goo d name " and lef t a memorable legac y tha t "blunts the sharpness of death." 31 Most founder s sa w paterna l self-sacrific e t o protec t posterit y a s natural . Simeon Howar d observe d tha t father s wer e bound t o thei r childre n "b y the common ti e o f nature, " an d an y ma n wh o "ha s th e bowel s o f a father" fel t duty-bound to defend his children against dangers such as "the iron scepter of tyranny." Paterna l vigilanc e wa s reinforce d b y intimation s o f immortality . "The Preceptor" argued that a mans willingness to put himself at peril for his children's libert y "wil l mak e hi m venerabl e an d belove d whil e h e lives , b e lamented and honored if he falls in so glorious a cause, and transmit his name and immorta l renow n t o his latest posterity." Americans agree d that th e on e force i n lif e mor e powerful tha n men' s Hobbesian driv e for self-preservatio n was their desire to preserve their posterity. This agreement was manifested i n George Mason's conviction that a father "wil l be quickly converted into a soldier when he knows and feels that he is to fight not in defense of the rights of a particular famil y or prince but his own." 32 Nevertheless, fathers had to put their posterity at risk to teach their sons to defend thei r famil y dynasties . They require d youn g me n t o tes t thei r man hood by joining with them to bear arms in militia units established to defen d liberty and locality. Robert Gross describes the militia muster as a sort of "family reunion." John Adam s affirme d a willingness t o pu t hi s posterit y a t ris k when he wrote in 1777, "I wish my lads were old enough. I would send every one of them into the army in some capacity or other. Military abilities and experience are a great advantage to character." Military service challenged youth to show they were not Thomas Paine' s "summer soldier s and sunshin e patriots" bu t citizen-soldier s wh o merite d "th e lov e an d thank s o f ma n an d woman." The challenge could be daunting. Paine explained, "Some men have naturally a military turn , an d ca n brav e hardships an d th e ris k of life with a cheerful face ; others have n o t . . .. I believe most men have more courage than they know of and that a little at first is enough to begin with." Jefferson pre scribed tha t youn g me n wh o foun d courage , brave d hardship , riske d death , and survive d earne d " a quiet an d undisturbe d repos e i n th e boso m o f thei r families."33 Of course , young men who went t o war expose d themselve s t o disabilit y and death , an d potentiall y imperile d thei r families ' dynasti c futures . I f the y

The Family Man and Citizenship I 9 3

served with hono r an d died , the y would b e celebrated with "recollection s o f manly sorrow," but their deaths would eliminate future branches of their family trees . That wa s why Georg e Washingto n wa s ambivalen t abou t sendin g into battle a step-grandson who was "the only male of his great great grandfa thers family " an d thu s th e sol e hope fo r dynasti c survival . Anticipating wa r with Franc e in 1798, Washington recommende d tha t th e boy become a Cornet o f Horse . "I f rea l dange r threatene d th e country, " h e wrote, "n o youn g man ough t t o b e an idl e spectator i n it s defense." Bu t he hoped rea l dange r would be averted. That way, the boy would "b e entitled t o the merit of proffered servic e without encounterin g th e danger s o f war" an d likel y liv e lon g enough to perpetuate his bloodline. 34 An important challeng e of fatherhood wa s passing liberty to adult sons by allowing them t o make their own decision s abou t famil y procreation , provi sion, an d protection . Man y father s ha d a n economi c stak e in keepin g olde r sons dependen t o n the m becaus e filial labo r contribute d t o famil y farms . Some fathers simply did not want to give up authority. A father migh t bless a sons marriage and give him use of land for his family but retain legal title as a means to maintain paternal control. Or a father coul d use the prospect of inheritance and th e psychological lever of intergenerational friendshi p t o pressure adult sons to conform t o paternal expectations. Sooner or later, however, fathers wer e expected t o perform wha t Pain e called "a n act o f manhood" b y renouncing paterna l authorit y an d freein g adul t son s t o achiev e indepen dence, family status, and governance of their own dependents. Renunciatio n was risky. Once freed , a s Jefferson recognized , a mans son s could "disavow " him, forsake family obligations, and put personal pleasure above family security an d longevity. 35 I n general , th e foundin g generatio n wa s ambivalen t about whethe r father s shoul d encourag e libert y amon g thei r childre n o r in stead seek to protect posterity from it s self-destructive tendencies . The founder s midwife d a n "improvemen t ethic " conducive t o th e libert y of new generations. Bernard Bailyn argues that this ethic "reflected th e beginnings of a permanent motion within American society by which the continuity of th e generation s wa s t o b e repeatedl y broken. " Father-so n bond s wer e weakened as more fathers lacked the resources and knowledge needed to guide and assis t youth, an d a s more sons left hom e i n searc h o f independence an d prosperity. Some founders di d not see this trend as troublesome. Often, son s separated fro m an d eve n rebelle d agains t thei r father s t o becom e jus t lik e them, tha t is , to become independent landowner s an d farmers . Also, youthful independence was a recognized source of innovation. Jefferson argue d that the doctrine that "w e must tread with artful reverenc e in the footsteps o f our

94 I The Family Man and Citizenship

fathers" was a barrier to "the progress of the human mind." Paine detested the "vanity" o f me n wh o sough t t o gover n fro m "beyon d th e grave " an d ap plauded th e prospect tha t "childre n gro w into men " who were free t o follo w the light of their own reason. 36 The founders themselves participated in efforts t o improve on the world of their fathers an d procreate a better world fo r thei r sons . They set precedent s by denying filial loyalty to Grea t Britai n an d b y analogizing an independen t America t o a "young heir arrive d a t a mature ag e who, bein g freed fro m th e restraints o f tutor s an d governors , take s th e managemen t o f hi s ow n estat e into his own hands and makes such laws for the regulation of his domestic af fairs as he judges will be most conducive to establish peace, order, and happiness in his family." Federalist s rejecte d th e authority o f yesterdays stat e constitutions and the Articles of Confederation t o support the U.S. Constitution. Their attitud e was capture d i n James Madison' s observatio n tha t American s showed "a decent regard to the opinions of former times" but avoided "a blind veneration fo r antiquity , fo r custom , an d fo r names. " That enable d the m t o exhibit a "manly spirit" and produce the "numerous innovations displayed on the American theater." 37 Simultaneously, mos t founder s wer e trouble d b y th e notio n tha t father s were fated fo r obsolescence. Madison praise d his generations innovations because they promised t o suppress the "mutability" o f state laws and suppor t a Constitution designe d t o "decid e forever th e fate o f republican government " and "las t for th e ages." He advocate d a Bill of Rights that strengthene d "th e frame" of the Constitution an d rendered mens liberties "perpetual." Later, he called on Washington's administratio n t o honor pas t treaties with th e France (though th e Frenc h governmen t ha d bee n revolutionized) , claimin g tha t Americans wer e oblige d t o kee p pas t promise s les t ever y chang e o r refor m constitute a "destruction o f the social pact, an annihilation o f property, and a complete establishment o f the state of nature."38 Like Plato, Madison tende d to prais e one-time innovation s intende d t o creat e a stable and relativel y un changeable legacy. Most founders share d this tendency. They saw the Revolution and Constitution as one-time affairs tha t produced enduring institutions. Antifederalists such a s "John DeWitt " argue d agains t th e Constitutio n becaus e ratificatio n would not be "temporary but in its nature perpetual," creating "a government . . . fo r ages. " Patrick Henry warned, "I f a wrong step be now made, th e republic may be lost forever." Federalist s such as Alexander Hamilton, arguin g for th e Constitution , agree d tha t a misstep no w meant tha t republica n gov ernment "would be . .. disgrace d and lost to mankind forever." The founder s

The Family Man and Citizenship I 9 5

consistently spok e a s i f ever y decisio n woul d fix th e cours e o f posterity , i n John Adams's estimation, for "thousand s of years." Much of this was political rhetoric, bu t i t was rhetori c tha t reflecte d a n anxiety , identifie d b y Michae l Lienesch, that future generation s would seek to "play the roles of revolutionaries and constitutionalists themselves , emulating the example of the framer s by destroyin g thei r governmen t an d preemptin g thei r plac e a s founders." 39 The founders di d not intend t o be preempted b y their children . Lienesch suggests that the founders "marche d into the future fearfully , an d always with a n ey e to th e past. " They articulate d a n improvemen t ethi c bu t also recalled tha t men' s passionate, impulsive, and greed y nature gav e rise to public disorder s tha t destroye d pas t achievement s an d prevente d futur e ad vances. They wondered i f their son s and grandsons , who ha d neve r suffere d British tyranny or fought fo r independence, would appreciate manly freedo m and patriotic sacrifice, o r instead lapse into selfish, childis h behavior that un dermined the Republic. Federalists complained loudest about mens tendency to abuse liberty and practice licentiousness, but even Jefferson an d his followers, their fait h i n huma n progres s notwithstanding , worrie d abou t men' s excesses. Jefferson approve d o f "the spirit" of Shays's Rebellion bu t thought th e rebellion itself a mistake. He opposed the Alien and Sedition Acts, in part, t o counteract policie s tha t wer e "drivin g thes e states int o revolution. " H e sup ported protest s prio r t o th e Frenc h Revolutio n i n th e hop e tha t the y woul d spawn modest reforms that averted bloodshed. Often, Jefferson promote d th e rhetoric of liberty but was cautious about its practice among masses of disorderly men. 40 A few founders were explicit about wanting their generation to bind futur e ones. John Adam s sa w written document s a s a n importan t mean s t o foste r order in the ranks of men: "The social compact and the laws must be reduced to writing. Obedience t o them become s a national habit an d the y cannot b e changed but by revolutions which are costly things. Men will be too economical o f thei r bloo d an d propert y t o hav e recours e t o the m ver y frequently. " Adams wanted American men's liberty to be tempered by a habitual obedience reinforced b y marriage and fatherhood, whic h provided men a family interes t in safeguarding their "blood and property" rather than risking them in protest and rebellion. 41 For Adams, the cautious Family Man who protected his family and estat e and habituall y obeyed th e law was the backbone o f republica n order. Thomas Paine's description o f a republic as a timeless polity was a creative effort t o resolv e intergenerational tensions . A republic, he wrote, was "never young, neve r old . . . subject neithe r t o nonage , nor dotag e . . . never i n th e

96 I The Family Man and Citizenship cradle, nor on crutches." It possessed " a perpetual stamina" that presented it self "on the open theater of the world in a fair an d manly manner." A republic did not suffer childis h delusions of inevitable progress or senile fears of inevitable decline. Rather , i t relie d o n a n understandin g tha t manhoo d wa s a source of continuity across time and space. The responsible Family Man procreated, provisioned , an d protecte d hi s son s an d lef t behin d a manly legacy likely to be remembered by his sons even as they sought to demonstrate thei r own merit through experimentation an d innovation. This promise of filialremembrance was fulfilled i n exemplary fashion a t the death of Henry Laurens by his son John, who "reare d an altar on which he burnt th e body of the patriarch an d carefully gathere d the ashes from th e hearth, deposited the m i n a silver urn, and placed them in his bed-chamber with reverence and veneration . . . a t once a mark of the respect due to the memory of both th e patriot an d the parent." 42

The Parent and the Patriot Significant similaritie s unite d th e paren t an d th e patriot. Bot h role s require d men to discipline their passions and forgo the Bachelor s egomaniacal search for gratification. Both roles demanded that men engage in responsible, industrious, orderly conduct tha t benefited othe r people. Both roles enjoined me n t o govern women, ideally , with women's consent . Bot h role s called for me n t o procreate posterity an d devot e themselve s t o th e goo d o f posterity. Finally , bot h roles challenged men to measure up to consensual norms of manhood in order to earn self-respect and social respectability. Most founders were convinced that the self-disciplined, responsible , respectable Family Man was qualified fo r citizenship and deserved to share in the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. Americans inherite d th e Englis h belie f tha t onl y substantial freeholder s were sufficiently independen t and committed to the public good to be trusted with citizenship, but two aspects of the American experience urged flexibility. First, Americas rhetoric of liberty and equality suggested that all men were potentially worthy of citizenship. This create d a presumption fo r inclusiveness . Second, Americas abundanc e o f land seeme d t o affor d ever y young man a n opportunity t o acquir e property , marry , an d rais e children . Theoretically , every mal e coul d becom e a modest freeholde r an d Famil y Man . Whil e th e founders continue d t o put th e substantial freeholde r a t the center of citizenship, they began to expand citizenshi p b y situating the Family Man nea r th e center of public life.

The Family Man and Citizenship I 9 7 Benjamin Frankli n observed , " A man remarkabl y wavering and inconstan t . . . ca n neve r b e a trul y usefu l membe r o f th e commonwealth. " Unlik e th e Bachelor, th e Family Man wa s "in th e way of becoming a useful citizen. " Poo r young men coul d "begi n first a s servants or journeymen, an d i f they are sober, industrious, an d frugal , the y soo n becom e masters , establis h themselve s i n business, marry , rais e families , an d becom e respectabl e citizens. " Economi c opportunity wa s a basi s fo r marriage ; marriag e wa s a foundatio n fo r father hood; an d fatherhoo d promote d th e stabilit y essentia l t o citizenship . Samue l West suggeste d tha t "th e tende r affectio n tha t we have for ou r wive s and chil dren [and ] th e regar d w e ough t t o hav e fo r unbor n posterity " counteracte d men's selfishnes s an d encourage d th e manl y self-denial , famil y responsibility , and modicu m o f civi c virtu e essentia l t o citizenship . Ultimately , th e Famil y Mans independence , famil y loyalty , an d commitmen t t o th e futur e encour aged hi m t o exhibi t " a giganti c manliness " b y provisionin g an d protectin g a family withi n " a well-constituted republic." 43 The clos e associatio n o f th e Famil y Ma n an d citizenshi p wa s a recurrin g theme i n th e founders ' speeche s an d writings . I n 1776 , fo r example , Thoma s Jefferson wrot e t o Edmund Pendleton , " I cannot doub t an y attachment t o hi s country i n an y ma n wh o ha s his famil y an d peculiu m i n it . . . . I [am ] fo r ex tending th e righ t o f suffrag e (o r i n othe r word s th e right s o f a citizen ) t o al l who [have ] a permanen t intentio n o f livin g i n th e country . Tak e wha t cir cumstances yo u pleas e a s evidence o f this , eithe r th e havin g reside d a certai n time, o r havin g a family, o r havin g property , an y o r al l of them. " Contempo raries wer e generall y willin g t o entertai n formall y an d affir m informall y th e proposition tha t a man wh o heade d a family ha d a n endurin g attachmen t t o the publi c good . Tha t wa s Georg e Mason' s reasonin g whe n h e propose d en franchising th e Famil y Ma n a t th e Constitutiona l Convention : A freehold i s the qualificatio n i n Englan d an d henc e i t i s imagined t o b e th e only proper one . The tru e ide a [is ] that ever y man havin g evidence of attachment to and permanent commo n interes t with the society ought to share in all its rights and privileges . Was this qualification restraine d t o freeholders ? Doe s no other kind o f property but lan d evidenc e a common interes t i n the proprietor? Does nothing besides property make a permanent attachment? Ought. . . the parent of a number of children whose fortunes ar e to be pursued in his own country to be viewed as suspicious characters and unworthy to be trusted with the common right s of their fellow citizens? 44 Franklin adde d tha t "th e son s o f a substantia l farmer, " thoug h no t ye t inde pendent freeholder s o r famil y heads , anticipate d becomin g famil y me n and ,

98 I The Family Man and Citizenship therefore, "woul d not be pleased at being disfranchised." Madiso n hinted at a greater degree of inclusiveness when observing that America had "the precious advantage" of having a male majority o f "freeholders, o r thei r heirs , or aspirants t o freeholds." 45 Me n wh o owne d famil y estates , thos e likel y to inheri t them, and even those who aspired to acquire them migh t b e trusted t o combine independence and public loyalty to merit citizenship. Ruth Bloch comments that "American men were advised that good republican citizenshi p . . . would follo w ineluctabl y from tru e love and marriage. " They were also led t o believ e that goo d citizenshi p was foreclosed t o bachelors, whose vice s enslave d the m an d estrange d the m fro m th e publi c good . Thus, when Benjami n Rus h made a plea for tax-supporte d publi c educatio n in the early republic, he assumed tha t th e Family Man was sufficiently civic minded t o understan d th e need t o subsidiz e schools tha t taugh t young me n "virtue an d knowledg e i n th e state. " However , h e fel t compelle d t o mak e a special, utilitarian case that appealed to the Bachelor s self-interest. H e argued that publi c educatio n woul d reduc e crim e an d disorde r and , therefore , "th e bachelor will in time save his tax for thi s purpose by being able to sleep with fewer bolts and locks on his doors." 46 The connectio n betwee n th e Family Man an d citizenship was loudly proclaimed by federalists i n the debates over the U.S. Constitution. They argued that th e Famil y Man s self-restrain t an d famil y interest s guarantee d tha t h e would ac t th e par t o f a responsibl e citize n wh o mad e reasonabl e choices . Fisher Ames detested democracy's "lou d clamors of passion, artifice, an d fac tion," but he supported biennial elections to the House of Representatives "as security that th e sober, second though t o f the people shall be law." His fait h in voter sobriety and thoughtfulness wa s based on his confidence i n "the calm review of public transaction s which i s made by the citizens who have families and children, the pledges of their fidelity>"47 Often, federalist s promote d a family-oriented imag e o f voter sovereignt y tha t qualifie d libert y with famil y so briety. Federalists also employed the image of the Family Man t o suggest that th e new governmen t wa s committe d t o th e publi c good . John Ja y trie d t o cas t away fears tha t th e president an d Senat e would ratif y treatie s contrary to th e public good by noting tha t "the y and thei r famil y estate s will . . . b e equally bound an d affecte d wit h th e res t o f th e community. " James Iredel l di d no t worry about a government that united the purse and sword because it was improbable "tha t our own representatives, chosen for a limited time , can be capable of destroying themselves, their families, and fortunes, eve n if they have no regar d t o thei r publi c duty. " Alexande r Hamilto n sa w n o nee d t o b e

The Family Man and Citizenship I 9 9

alarmed by federal control of state militia because "our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fello w citizens " manned th e militia . Finally , Zachariah John ston did not see the Constitution as oppressive because federal representative s "will probably have families [and ] they cannot forget them. " A representative would not arbitrarily burden citizens because he "will be averse to lay taxes on his ow n posterity." 48 Federalist s proclaime d tha t nationa l official s woul d b e trustworthy becaus e they too would b e fathers responsibl e for thei r families ' welfare. Federalists also construed family status as a bond o f trust between citizen s and leaders . Hamilto n suggeste d tha t th e Famil y Ma n woul d trus t a leader who, like himself, was the father o f "children t o whom th e ties of nature an d habit have attached me. " After all , a father i n a position o f leadership woul d not choose "the precarious enjoyment o f rank and power" by participating in "a system which would reduc e his . . . posterity to slavery and ruin. " Rather , he woul d approac h th e futur e cautiously , wit h hi s childre n servin g a s "th e dearest pledges of [his] patriotism." Furthermore, the average Family Man was apt t o consen t t o politica l authorit y whe n i t wa s bathe d i n th e benig n lan guage o f fatherhood . Tha t wa s James Wilsons assumptio n whe n h e argue d that just as a responsible father gav e priority to the welfare o f his children, so too would the new president "watch over the whole with paternal care and af fection."49 Federalist s use d paterna l imager y t o mak e th e Constitutio n an d new government fee l familiar an d friendly . David Ramsay summarized the federalist identificatio n o f the Family Man with citizenshi p when h e calle d o n th e American peopl e t o "hono r th e me n who with their own hands maintain their family and raise up children who are inured to toil and capable of defending thei r country." These honorable me n were sufficiently stead y and trustworth y t o wield th e rights and responsibili ties of citizenship; and the y were sufficiently respecte d an d truste d b y othe r men t o be considered fo r position s o f political leadership an d authority . The federalist fait h i n the Family Man who voted in elections and consented to be governed b y other famil y me n prompte d Timothy Pickerin g t o expres s a father s ultimate plea for ratification : "If I were now on m y dying bed and m y sons were of mature age, " he wrote, "m y last words to them would b e adop t this constitution." 50 This connection betwee n th e Family Man an d citizenship effectively fore closed th e possibilit y o f identifyin g th e Famil y Woman wit h citizenship . In large part, the founders believe d the Family Man was sufficiently trustworth y to participate i n politics becaus e he was responsible for governing , a s well as provisioning and protecting, a spouse and children. A dutiful husban d settled

ioo I The Family Man and Citizenship

down into patriarchal responsibility. He learned to differentiate authorit y and tyranny by governing his wife. He exercise d family master y to control disor derly female tendencies . He claime d a n exclusive sex right t o hi s wife's bod y to guarantee his paternity and secure his dynastic stake in the future. The result, accordin g t o Lind a Kerber , wa s tha t "formulation s o f citizenshi p an d civic relation s i n a republi c wer e tightl y linke d t o me n an d manhood. " A whole new language had to be devised even to contemplate women's citizenship. That languag e focuse d o n th e rol e o f th e republica n wif e an d mothe r who served as a moral monitor and civic educator for her family. Whether this role afforde d wome n significan t influenc e i n a n informa l "fourt h branc h o f government," a s Kerbe r suggests , o r kep t the m "locke d i n ste p behin d th e legal status o f men," a s Joan Hof f argues , it certainl y reflecte d th e founders ' consensus tha t th e Famil y Woman wa s exclude d fro m publi c deliberation s and suffrage, a s well as jury service and the militia muster. 51 The founders ' fait h i n th e Famil y Man a s a citizen wa s substantial—bu t still limited. He manned the front line s of authority. He headed a family, provisioned an d protecte d it , rule d dependents , an d taugh t lesson s i n benevo lence, productivity, civility , an d deferenc e t o authority . Ideally , he lightene d the burden o f women's subordination an d prepare d young males to practic e good citizenship. His family was a crucial building block for a stable republic. However, th e founder s di d no t forge t tha t th e Famil y Ma n wa s stil l a male creature who often faile d t o restrain passion, fulfill responsibility , or reconcile family interest s with th e public good. Like western Massachusetts farmer s o r Philadelphia artisans, he sometimes claimed that his family's welfare justifie d disobedience t o establishe d politica l authority . The founder s presume d tha t the Family Man would be a trustworthy citizen, but they also sought security against his lapses from goo d citizenship.

The Limits of Family-Based Citizenship Most founders agreed that family ties were a powerful sourc e of unity and stability among men. Antifederalist "Cato " explained, "Th e stronges t principl e of union reside s within ou r domestic walls. The ties of the parent exceed that of any other. As we depart fro m home , the next general principle of union is among citizen s o f th e sam e state , where acquaintance , habits , an d fortune s nourish affection an d attachment." Federalist Alexander Hamilton concurre d "that a man i s more attache d t o hi s family tha n t o hi s neighborhood, t o hi s neighborhood tha n t o th e communit y a t large." 52 The Famil y Man' s affec -

The Family Man and Citizenship I 10 1

tions, loyalties, and interests radiated out from hi s family to neighbors, community, state , an d nation . Famil y tie s boun d me n t o th e large r public ; bu t they als o promote d parochia l loyaltie s tha t potentiall y conflicte d wit h th e public good. In the 1760s and 1770s, radical artisans argued for the right of family me n to vote and hold office. They also invoked their status as independent house holders t o legitimize their participation i n political rallies , clubs, campaigns, petition drives , and elections . Gar y Nash argue s that American civi c leaders were horrified b y this "crumblin g o f deference." A more modest outloo k o n the Family Man was better attuned to the founders' desire for orderly politics. Joseph Lathrop stated, "He that practices every virtue in private life and trains up a family i n virtuous principles an d manner s i s no useles s or unimportan t member of society."53 Lathrop implied that the Family Man achieved a sort of plateau. H e wa s no t a disorderl y bachelor ; thus , h e coul d b e a citizen . Nonetheless, his virtue was not necessarily sufficient t o qualify hi m for polit ical action and leadership. Why not? The founders had limited trust in the Family Man for several reasons. First, a thi n lin e separate d th e Famil y Ma n fro m th e Bachelor . The Famil y Ma n vowed to control his appetites and fulfill hi s responsibilities, but his practice often fel l short . Benjami n Franklin mad e a goo d livin g writin g abou t th e foibles an d failings o f weak and bumblin g husbands an d fathers. Man y were guilty o f licentiousness ; man y di d no t settl e dow n int o famil y life ; man y proved themselves social misfits. Joel Barlow went so far as to suggest that fa thers were sometimes "too ignorant and often to o inattentive or avaricious to be trusted with the sole direction of their children." Recalling common Puri tan practice , h e suggeste d tha t th e stat e shoul d supervis e th e Famil y Man s governance of his dependents. 54 Second, even the most benign Family Man had the potential to act against the public good. Benjamin Rus h advocated a system of public education tha t taught eac h young man "t o love his family bu t . . . a t the same time that h e must forsake his family and even forget the m when the welfare of his country requires it." The sheer strength of the Family Man's attachment t o his closest relations diminished th e likelihood that he would forsake or forget hi s famil y for the public good or allow his sons to do so. George Washington's constan t complaint agains t militiame n wa s that the y quickly demobilized o r deserte d to return to their families rather than contributing to the public good by fighting for the duration of the war. In 1783, Washington attributed the threat of a military insurrectio n t o th e fact tha t unpai d officer s wer e forced "t o partici pate their estates" to support themselve s while in the service. They had "con -

102 I The Family Man and Citizenship

tracted heavy debts" and "spen t their patrimonies." 55 Even honorable gentlemen woul d ac t i n rebelliou s way s when the y fel t thei r families , estates , an d posterity were threatened by undue sacrifices fo r the nation . Third, the founders fel t the Family Mans interests could be a source of political corruption . Antifederalist s suc h a s Melancto n Smit h worrie d tha t "pride of family" was so infectious and commanded so much influence amon g all classes of Americans that voters would elect to public office only men fro m noteworthy families. The likely result, according to "Brutus, " was that "larg e family connections " and mutuall y profitable combination s amon g "th e wellborn and highest orders" would create a political monopoly among aristocrats who wer e ignoran t o f th e sentiment s an d interest s o f "th e middlin g class. " Federalists such as John Adams agreed that famil y prid e played an inevitabl e role i n America n politics . Hi s fea r wa s tha t men s famil y loyaltie s stoppe d short of the public good. The majority o f men "confin e thei r benevolence t o their families," and "ver y few indeed extend it impartially to the whole community." The consequenc e was that Americans suffered fro m a parochialism powerful enoug h "t o blind our eyes, darken ou r understandings, and perver t our wills."56 For Adams and others, men who could not overcome family partiality lacked th e virtue an d talen t necessar y to b e ranked amon g th e Bette r Sort of men who were qualified t o lead society and fill public offices . Finally, many founders feared that the Family Man, who devoted his life to building an d perpetuatin g a family dynasty , harbore d a n unspoke n admira tion fo r Europe' s powerfu l aristocrati c families , whic h ha d sustaine d them selves over many generations. The Society of the Cincinnati, a n exclusive organization o f Revolutionar y Wa r officer s tha t perpetuate d itsel f b y makin g membership an inheritance of eldest sons, attracted many critics who considered its existence evidence that American officers an d gentlemen were infatu ated with aristocrati c corruption. John Adams went s o far a s to sugges t tha t Europe's aristocrati c familie s attracte d th e secre t devotio n o f virtuall y al l Americans. He wrote to Jefferson, "I f the duke of Angoleme, or Burgundy, or especially the Dauphin shoul d deman d on e of your beautiful an d most ami able daughter s i n marriage , al l Americ a fro m Georgi a t o Ne w Hampshir e would find their vanity and pride so agreeably flattered by it that all their sage maxims would give way; and even our sober New England republicans would keep a day o f Thanksgiving fo r it , i n thei r hearts." 57 Alas, th e Famil y Ma n often preferre d famil y pride and prejudice t o the public good. The founders ' limite d fait h i n th e Famil y Ma n prompte d the m t o con struct fo r hi m a truncated conceptio n o f citizenship. O n th e on e hand , th e Family Ma n wa s sufficientl y procreativ e t o star t a family , provisio n depen -

The Family Man and Citizenship I 10 3 dents, an d prolon g hi s famil y dynasty . H e wa s relativel y sober , safe , an d pre dictable, an d coul d clai m libert y an d equalit y withou t automaticall y lapsin g into anarchi c libertinis m o r democrati c leveling . H e coul d b e truste d t o be come wha t Michae l Lienesc h describe s a s a "privat e citizen"—someon e wh o cultivates a farm, pursue s famil y interests , contribute s t o hi s community , an d occasionally votes fo r publi c officials. 58 O n th e othe r hand , th e Famil y Man s procreativity was parochial. Hi s famil y interest s di d no t necessaril y encourag e him t o exhibi t th e elevate d manl y virtu e an d talen t neede d t o cultivat e socia l harmony o r generat e th e publi c good . No r di d h e demonstrat e th e politica l potential t o resolv e majo r crises , foun d ne w nations , o r buil d a bette r futur e for humankind . Guilt y o f familia l parochialis m an d innocen t o f Baconia n greatness, th e averag e family ma n wa s a private citize n i n nee d o f public lead ership. Indeed, th e founder s coul d no t imagin e a simpl e republi c o f me n base d solely on th e exclusio n o f th e Bachelo r an d th e inclusio n o f the Famil y Man . Democratic disorder s persisted . Interna l exigencie s wer e a dail y occurrence . External danger s wer e omnipresent . A crucia l questio n wa s whether th e aver age famil y ma n woul d continuousl y confor m t o norm s o f commo n decenc y and contribut e t o th e publi c good . Mos t founder s believe d tha t th e Famil y Man neede d stron g leadership . The y sough t me n o f grea t virtu e an d talent , even a fe w heroi c men , t o cal m democrati c disorders , mak e an d administe r law, resolv e crises , defea t enemies , an d lea d th e citizenr y dow n th e pat h o f providence. Even befor e th e Revolution , a "gentleman " coul d no t automaticall y clai m standing a s a natural leade r o f men . Afte r th e Revolution , th e rhetori c o f lib erty and equalit y reinforced patriots ' refusal t o recognize any man's natural su periority or authority . Conside r thi s exchange betwee n tw o "servants " in Roy all Tyler's play , The Contrast JESSAMY. I say, Sir, I understan d tha t Colone l Manl y has the honor o f having you for a servant. JONATHAN. Servant ! Sir , d o yo u tak e m e fo r a neger ? I a m Colone l Manl y s waiter. JESSAMY. A true Yankee distinction , egad , withou t a difference. Why , Sir , d o you no t perfor m al l the office s o f a servant? D o yo u no t eve n blacke n hi s boots? JONATHAN. Yes, I do grease them a bit sometimes ; but I am a true blue son o f liberty, for al l that. Fathe r said I should com e as Colonel Manl y s waiter t o see the world, an d al l that; bu t n o ma n shal l master me . My father ha s as good a farm a s the Colonel. 59

104 I The Family Man and Citizenship

If all white male property owners and their heirs were true blue sons of liberty, not servants or slaves, why would they recognize or comply with men claim ing leadership authority? Tyler's play suggested two answers. First, compliance was a matter of contract. Jonathan waited on Colonel Manly who, in return , provided his waiter an opportunity to see the world. This was a relatively weak basis for consen t becaus e it was contingent o n bot h parties ' satisfactory per formance. Second, compliance was a function o f respect. Jonathan deferred t o Colonel Manly because he recognized, admired, and deferred t o the Colonel's exceptional manly virtues and talents. Arguably, this was a stronger, more enduring basis for consent because it was built on consensual norms of manhood and reputed character rather than on utility and performance . The founders' politica l discourse often focuse d o n rationality and contract as a basis for legitimate leadership, but i t also centered o n evolving norms of manly respectability and deference. I n the aristocratic past, commoners were expected t o value an d obe y gentlemen's authority . I n th e revolutionar y pre sent, gentlemen's status was suspect and democratic equality defied deference . The founders becam e obsessed with reestablishing order in the ranks of men. They needed to identify "an alternative form of male cohesion" in order to sort out an d stabiliz e what Nanc y Cot t call s "shifting hierarchies " among men. 60 They turned t o the grammar o f manhood t o foster mal e cohesion. They applied i t t o pu t th e Famil y Ma n a t th e cente r o f citizenship an d the n t o en courage the sober citizenry to comply with the leadership of the Better Sort of man.

5 The Bette r Sort and Leadershi p

The Family Man fit into the fraternity o f men. The marriage contract wa s a fraternal contrac t tha t transforme d a single ma n int o a husban d who claime d a n exclusiv e sex right ove r his wife, agree d t o othe r men s mo nopoly ove r thei r wives , an d thereb y establishe d a "cooperativ e agreement " among the "brotherhood of free appropriators" of women's bodies. Mens joint "jurisdiction ove r women" helped to knit together male society. Additionally, the Family Man was a protector who enlisted in the Revolution to defend an d bequeath liberty. He achieved solidarity with the "manly citizenry" that stood in opposition to the "effeminate imperia l power" of the "mother country." Finally, the Family Man was a citizen who projected corruptio n ont o woman hood and allied civic virtue to the male birthing of society and procreation of new republics, thereby actualizing Jefferson's fantas y abou t me n reproducin g without women. 1 I n sum , earl y America n fraternit y presume d patriarcha l domination an d political exclusion of women. However, that fraternity wa s threatened b y intramale conflict. The Bachelor an d othe r disorderl y me n threatene d t o destro y fraternal unit y b y acting on "unmanl y ambition " t o upse t individua l lives , destroy families , an d rui n social harmony. Ann Fairfa x Withington report s that score s of popular play s dramatized a world of "rakes, thieves, sharpers, libidinous old m e n , . .. dupes , and 'chatterin g crop-eare d coxcombs' " who generate d constan t chao s i n th e ranks of men. Judith Sargent Murray especially worried that the Family Man's passion and parochialism, in tandem with his claims to freedom an d equality, fueled a factionalism capabl e of sinking a sword of discord into "th e vitals of that infan t constitution " onl y to cut loose "hell-born anarchy. " The founder s sought t o subdu e democrati c disorde r an d reinforc e fraterna l unit y b y em ploying the gramma r o f manhood t o encourag e th e Famil y Man t o identif y especially trustworthy men and submit voluntarily to their leadership. A mideighteenth-century visito r t o Portsmouth , Ne w Hampshire , identifie d th e leadership poo l when h e remarked, "Th e bette r sor t o f people here live very well and genteel." 2

105

io6 I The Better Sort and Leadership

Beyond Basic Membership Benjamin Frankli n ha d "grea t hopes " tha t hi s nephe w Benn y woul d matur e into " a worth y man. " Georg e Roger s Clar k aspire d t o a highe r status . H e wanted t o ear n th e respec t o f all virtuous an d wise men an d mad e i t his "fixe d principle" no t t o accep t an y hono r bu t "t o meri t i t first." Similarly , juris t James Ken t advise d ambitiou s youn g lawyer s t o exhibi t " a manly determina tion" t o meri t thei r membershi p i n th e legal fraternity. Th e founder s pu t grea t stock i n a father's obligatio n t o provide patrimony fo r hi s sons, but the y espe cially honored th e young man who demonstrate d persona l merit an d achieve d the distinctio n o f bein g "observed , considered , esteemed , praised , beloved , and admire d b y hi s fellows." 3 Ultimately , a n individual' s character , accom plishments, an d socia l recognitio n wer e wha t elevate d hi m int o th e rank s o f the Bette r Sort . The Famil y Ma n earne d elevate d standin g first b y honorin g famil y re sponsibilities an d the n b y shedding some selfishness an d parochialis m t o iden tify wit h a n extende d famil y o f men . Prio r t o th e Revolution , th e Bette r Sor t of ma n demonstrate d fidelity t o fello w colonist s an d Britis h brethre n b y en gaging i n "manl y an d spirite d bu t ye t respectfu l an d loya l petitioning " t o re dress colonia l grievances . H e affirme d manl y freedo m fo r American s an d maintained "brotherl y love" for th e English. I n 1776 , the Better Sor t exhibite d fraternal solidarit y wit h revolutionaries . Joh n Witherspoo n applaude d patri ots' commitmen t t o domesti c "orde r an d publi c peace " ami d th e chao s o f th e war, whil e Samue l McClintoc k congratulate d patriot s fo r bein g " a ban d o f brethren" tha t averte d interna l "anarch y an d confusion " t o unif y agains t th e enemy. After th e Revolution , writer s honore d America n men' s sens e of fello w feeling an d respec t fo r authority . Davi d Ramsa y praised patriot s fo r forgin g " a social band " whil e submittin g t o a Congres s whos e "recommendation s wer e more generally and mor e effectually carrie d into execution than th e laws of the best regulate d societies. " Mercy Oti s Warren calle d the Revolutio n " a singula r phenomenon i n th e stor y o f human conduct " becaus e law s an d government s were annihilate d bu t "recommendation s o f committee s an d convention s [were] equall y influentia l an d bindin g with th e severes t cod e o f law." 4 American me n demonstrate d durin g th e wa r tha t the y coul d transcen d individual ism an d localis m t o procreate a n extende d fraterna l orde r an d a n independen t nation. O n e basi s for tha t extende d fraterna l orde r was American men' s oppositio n to unmanly Britis h vices. Philip Greve n suggest s that American protester s an d rebels sough t "t o b e manl y rathe r tha n effeminate " b y supportin g republica n

The Better Sort and Leadership I 10 7

independence an d frugality agains t English luxury and effeminacy. Withing ton recall s that the First Continental Congres s drew up a code of moral con duct tha t banne d English-identifie d vice s such as cockfighting, hors e racing, the theater, an d lavis h funerals . Th e cod e articulated a unifying visio n "tha t made colonists aware of themselves as a people" who were "worthy of liberty." It cu t acros s clas s an d sectiona l difference s b y proscribing regiona l extrava gances, suc h a s norther n theatrical s an d souther n hors e races . I t urged colonists to build a sense of manly pride and community in opposition to various vices associated with libertines, gamblers, transients, backwoodsmen, immigrants, blacks, and Indians as well as Englishmen. Patriots united in opposition t o a deceitful mothe r countr y an d t o margina l me n infecte d b y licentiousness.5 Communities enforced th e congressional code mostly by employing social pressure, humiliation , an d ostracism . Loca l committee s an d leader s de manded tha t offender s recan t an d rejoi n th e community . The y stigmatize d men who trie d t o conceal thei r vices by accusing them o f "unmanly equivocation," subjecting them to ridicule, and urging them to confess and conform . They forced perpetrator s who seemed beyond persuasion t o endure rituals of public humiliation that included being tarred and feathered, drumme d out of town, o r "associate d wit h blacks. " A profligat e patrio t o r duplicitou s Tor y might be degraded and marginalized b y being handcuffed t o a black man fo r a period o f time o r b y being publicly whipped b y a black ma n befor e bein g banished from th e vicinity. Rituals of public humiliation an d social ostracism helped unif y fraterna l insider s a s well a s identify deviant s an d "rende r the m impotent."6 What motivate d America n men' s loyalt y t o extende d fraterna l families ? Most founder s believe d tha t me n naturall y desire d society . Assertion s tha t "man i s a gregarious animal" were accompanied b y avowals that man' s "happiness" is rooted in society, his misery in "solitary existence." Simultaneously, most founders felt that men's natural sociability was weak. Thomas Paine contrasted men's desire for society to their selfish "wickedness, " which demande d government restraints . Alexande r Hamilto n wa s absolutel y awe d b y men' s wickedness. Whil e other s applaude d wartim e solidarity , Hamilto n warne d that men' s "passion . . . fo r oppositio n t o tyrann y and oppressio n ver y natu rally leads them to a contempt and disregard for all authority."7 Approaching victory, many founders were greatly concerned about whether American me n could parlay wartime solidarity into peacetime sociability. Contemporaries generall y agreed that wartime experiences fostered frater nal feelings likely to outlast the war. David Ramsay noted that the Revolution

io8 I The Better Sort and Leadership

extended men s bond s fro m thei r familie s an d localitie s t o al l o f the forme r colonies. An isolated farmer migh t not have seen the relationship between his family interest s an d Britis h taxatio n o r eve n nationa l independence , bu t h e certainly identified wit h American men across the continent who, in one way or another, suffered redcoa t "depredation." That prompted him to "extinguish selfish passions," sacrifice parochialism "o n the altar of patriotism," and forg e "a common bon d o f unio n cementin g u s together. " Furthermore , patrioti c soldiers who died in the struggle left a legacy of enduring memories for thei r children, which would continu e t o provide "th e firm cement o f an extensiv e union" for generation s t o come. Military historian Do n Higginbotha m con cludes tha t American men s Revolutionar y War experience s were "th e brick s and mortar of nationality." 8 The war certainly stretched American men's sense of time, space, and politics. James Madison observed a new cosmopolitanism amon g easterners who became familia r wit h th e frontier durin g th e war and late r acquire d wester n lands "for their children." They formed " a new class of advocates" for western brethren an d children, for example, on issues related to the free navigation of the Mississippi River . Ramsay located anothe r sourc e of cosmopolitanism i n the continental relationships that soldiers fashioned durin g their marches and encampments. Sometimes these relationships blossomed into "intermarriage s between men and women of different states," projecting family feeling across generations an d geograph y t o provid e "a n additiona l cemen t t o th e union. " Continuing friendships an d extended family feelings eventually became a centerpiece i n th e federalis t cas e for a strong nationa l government . John Jay argued that Americans "fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war" became " a band o f brethren [who ] unite d t o each other b y the strongest tie s should never be split into a number o f unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties." Madison summoned "th e mingled blood" of Americas warriors to "consecrate" the proposed new union. 9 The founder s prolonge d wartim e solidarit y b y honorin g an d rewardin g veterans. Fo r example , Thomas Jefferson provide d James Monro e a letter o f introduction whic h emphasized tha t Monroe "serve d some time as an office r in the American army and as such distinguished himself in the affair of Princetown as well as on other occasions. . . . Should any circumstances render your patronage an d protectio n a s necessary a s they would b e alway s agreeabl e t o him, you may be assured they are bestowed on one fully worthy of them." An honorable veteran was presumed t o be deserving of men s trust an d good of fices. Conversely, a nonveteran migh t encounte r men s presumptiv e distrust . Pelatiah Webste r attacke d Pennsylvani a antifederalist s b y claiming tha t ver y

The Better Sort and Leadership I 10 9 few of them had fought i n the war. They should no t have opposed th e Con stitution but, instead, they should have given thanks for the "lenity" of the deserving citizen s who "permitted " the m "t o liv e among u s with impunity." 10 Implicitly, onl y member s o f th e Revolution s martia l fraternit y coul d spea k with authoritative public voices. Despite their belief in men's natural sociability and their efforts t o perpet uate wartime unity, most founders feared that postwar solidarity would not be "so great as will be necessary for the general good." Jefferson observe d that few friendships born e o f war stoo d th e tes t o f time . Me n quickl y "forge t them selves bu t i n th e sol e facult y o f makin g money. " A s earl y a s 1778 , Phillip s Payson reported a trend among men toward self-aggrandizement an d warned that the man who finds virtue solely in "what he hoards up in his barn or ties up in his purse" would be unable to practice good citizenship after the war. In 1783, George Mason announced that American ethics already had degenerated into a "depravity o f manners an d morals " that destroye d "al l confidence be tween man and man." He wondered whether victory "shall prove a blessing or 11 a curse."ii Many o f America s foremos t politica l an d militar y figures wer e disen chanted by men's postwar behavior. Selfishness an d parochialism appeare d t o have replaced civi c virtue an d cosmopolitanism . Georg e Washington wrote , "We have probably had too good an opinion of human nature in forming ou r confederation." Som e founders accepte d th e inevitabilit y o f possessive indi vidualism and hoped to sublimate it into an emerging semblance of self-made manhood. Bu t mos t founder s continue d t o urg e me n t o transfor m thei r wartime virtue into a peacetime civility consistent with th e ideals of republican manhood . Washingto n instructe d hi s demobilizin g troop s t o cultivat e "conciliating dispositions " an d disciplin e themselve s t o engag e i n "wis e an d manly conduct." Later , Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilto n issue d an exemplar y directiv e t o revenue-cutte r captain s wh o ha d bee n detaile d t o curtail smuggling : "[They] wil l alway s keep i n min d tha t thei r countryme n are freemen an d as such are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a domineering spirit.... They will endeavor to overcome difficulties . . . b y a cool and temperat e perseveranc e i n thei r duty , by address and moderatio n rather tha n b y vehemenc e o r violence." 12 I f martia l courag e an d fortitud e bound soldie r to soldier in wartime, then perhap s self-restrain t an d sociabil ity could bind citize n to citizen in peacetime. The founders calle d on Americans to cultivate civility. It was one thin g t o promot e civilit y among American me n bu t quit e an other t o expec t mos t me n t o practic e it . Man y founder s agree d wit h Noa h

n o I The Better Sort and Leadership

Webster's assessmen t tha t th e mal e majorit y suffere d fro m "roug h passions " that distracted them from "th e civilities of refined life." Even well-bred Americans often faile d to discipline their passions to conciliate other men. Jefferson observed in 1797, "I have formerly see n warm debates and high political passions. But gentlemen of different politic s would then speak to each other and separate the business of the Senate from tha t of society. It is not so now. Men who have been intimate all of their lives cross the street to avoid meeting and turn thei r heads another way lest they should be obliged t o touch thei r hats. This may do for young men with whom passion is enjoyment bu t it is afflict ing t o peaceabl e minds. " The Bette r Sor t o f ma n wa s no t a n impassione d youth wh o fostere d factiona l conflict . Rather , James Madiso n suggested , h e was one of the trustworthy few who was able to maintain manly integrity and "make friends" of opponents. 13

The Trustworthy Few The trustworth y fe w reconcile d aristocrati c manhoo d an d republicanism . They distinguishe d themselve s b y restrainin g thei r anima l instinct s an d ex emplifying th e moral s an d manner s o f "civilized " beings . The United States Magazine reported in 1778, "A man without taste and the acquirements of genius [is an] orangutan with the human shape and soul of a beast." By contrast, a ma n wit h tast e emulate d worth y gentlemen , understoo d socia l subtleties , and studied courtesy books to master the innumerable details of appropriate dress, speech, and conduct . Hi s success depended a s much o n hi s effort an d merit a s o n hi s birt h an d breeding . The Polite Philosopher explained, "I t i s want o f attention, no t capacity , which leave s us so many brutes. " Theoretically, al l me n coul d cultivat e gentilit y an d mov e u p i n society . A s Richar d Bushman put s it , middle - an d low-statu s me n coul d "striv e fo r elevatio n rather than resent subordination." 14 Bushman asserts that men striving for elevation and those who achieved it were "th e cemen t an d soul " o f society . Forres t McDonal d argue s tha t th e founders considere d socia l climbing a virtue when i t involved soliciting "th e esteem of wise and good men." In turn, high-status men were obligated to be benefactors t o low-statu s men . "Th e Preceptor " explaine d tha t gentilit y re quired "th e tru e gentleman , rathe r tha n shunnin g o r scoffin g a t inferiors , show affability an d condescension t o all who were below him." Gentility also enjoined gentleme n to "defend an d patronize their dependents and inferiors " in order to ensure that Americas "diversit y of ranks and conditions" blende d

The Better Sort and Leadership I i n

into fraterna l harmony . Joh n Perkin s though t fulfillin g thi s obligatio n wa s challenging because "the rustic" often despise d "the gentle manner and obliging behavior of the well-bred and polite" and considered gentility incompatible with "manly fortitude and resolution." Perkins expected the Better Sort to resolve the tension between aristocratic manners and republican simplicity by reforming th e rustic , encouragin g hi m t o redefin e manhoo d a s refinement , and teaching him proper behavior. Similarly, John Adams called on gentlemen to spread among commoners a gospel of "good humor, sociability, good manners, and good morals . . . some politeness but more civility." 15 Refined moral s an d manner s wer e especiall y importan t marker s o f mal e worth i n a mobile society where a steady stream o f strangers poured int o established communitie s an d carve d out ne w ones. The founder s wante d me n to settl e down an d rais e families bu t kne w tha t man y youth ha d t o travers e time an d spac e t o demonstrat e meri t an d ear n a n independent , respectabl e place fo r themselve s an d thei r familie s i n th e cit y o r o n th e frontier . Wh o among the m coul d b e trusted? Stranger s were judged b y their dress , speech, and conduct . Those considere d crude , lustful, an d impulsiv e attracte d othe r men s distrust whereas those exhibiting manly refinement gaine d eligibility for admission int o polit e society. Bushman point s out that , i n a n era of change, the ability to exhibit good morals and manners "enabled wanderers to claim a place, forge a n identity , an d establis h a recognized hierarchy." 16 Refinemen t helped order the ranks of strangers. A refined orde r was a hierarchical orde r with th e Bachelor on the bottom , the Family Man in the middle, and the Better Sort at the top. Most founder s believed tha t fe w me n sufficientl y mastere d th e challenge s o f refinemen t t o deserve top ranking. Mastery was difficult. I t went beyond exhibiting prope r morals and manners; it also meant maintaining manly independence an d in tegrity in difficul t circumstances. A man wa s truly respectable onl y if he exhibited " a free and manly spirit." He had "t o think with boldness and energy, to form hi s principles upon fai r enquiry, and to resign neither his conscience nor his person to the capricious will of men." Few men demonstrated this independence an d integrity , along with sincerit y and honesty, when presse d t o conform t o conventiona l idea s an d prevailin g opinions . Moreover , master y entailed balancing manly integrity with civility in order to reconcile independent thought with social order. George Washington advise d that "manl y candor" should be accompanied b y a "manly tone of intercourse" and a disposition to deal "freely" with another man by treating him "like a friend." Alexander Hamilto n propose d a unio n o f opennes s an d modesty , recommendin g that Presiden t John Adams exhibi t "manly but calm and sedate firmness . . .

in I

The Better Sort and Leadership

without strut. " Edmund Randolp h exemplifie d th e ideal of aristocratic manhood i n a republic: he harbored "n o indifferenc e t o publi c opinion , bu t re solved no t t o cour t i t b y an unmanl y sacrific e o f my ow n judgment." Joh n Stevens praise d Randolp h fo r hi s "manliness"—fo r hi s "candor " an d "deli cacy" in paying homage to public opinion even when opposing it. 17 The Better Sort possessed "the most attractive merit and the most diffusiv e and establishe d characters. " They made independent decision s but acte d "i n conjunction wit h others " to promote a "moral culture of the heart" that fos tered "all endearing ties of gratitude and love which unite man to man in the discharge o f reciprocal duties. " They were an elit e skilled a t mediatin g indi vidual liberty and fraternal order . This made them particularly qualified t o be leaders an d lawmakers . Unfortunately , man y founder s feared , th e mal e ma jority ofte n confuse d th e trustworth y fe w wit h deceiver s an d manipulator s who feigned manl y integrity and civility to acquire base popularity, "a n adulteress o f th e first order. " Speaker s alerte d American s t o pretenders . Samue l Wales differentiated worth y leaders who earned "tru e popularity" b y gaining the "esteem of the virtuous and wise" from dangerous demagogues engaged in a "mad pursuit o f low popularity" b y "flattery." Noa h Webster distinguishe d the respectable man of "real worth" from th e "popularity-seeker, or mere man of th e people " wh o "banishe s cando r an d substitute s prejudice." 18 Th e founders were quite concerned that the man of real worth, rather than the deceiver, establish an elevated reputation to secure hegemony by inspiring common me n to invest their trust, consent, and quiescence in his leadership and authority.

A Mans Reputation Virtually all founders agree d with James Madison tha t "distinction s [amon g men] ar e variou s an d unavoidable. " Man y concurre d wit h Judit h Sargen t Murray tha t libert y "dreadet h tha t tumultuou s an d up-rootin g hurrican e which, inminglin g th e variou s classe s o f mankind , destroyet h th e beautifu l gradation an d series of harmony." Some concluded with Peres Fobes that distinctions amon g men produce d natura l inequalitie s tha t invite d dominatio n and subordination: "We behold in the countenance of some persons a kind of dignity which at once beams reverence and designates for dominion ; i n oth ers, we observ e suc h a vacancy an d prostratio n o f dignit y a s equall y mark s them for subjection." Perhap s the norm among the founders was Noah Webster's notion tha t th e Bette r Sor t o f man ha d "jus t claims " to elevate d socia l

The Better Sort and Leadership I 11 3

status and "influence an d authority." 19 Republicanism di d not destroy hierarchy. Rather, it called on the Better Sort to build manly reputations in order to attract sufficient publi c trust to be entrusted with political authority . From th e onse t o f colonization, American s considere d " a good name " o f the utmost importance. Mary Beth Norton state s that a man had to establish and maintai n hi s "credit" and "reputatio n o f being worthy of belief or trust " to participat e i n th e ora l agreement s tha t shape d socia l interaction s an d t o maintain his status in a society where legal supports for the male pecking order were mostly absent. The significanc e o f reputation persiste d int o th e found ing era when, fo r example , Martin Howar d proclaime d "th e high value of a good name and how dear it is to men of sentiment and honor." A good name fortified a mans self-esteem, enhance d his opportunities, increased his admirers, and enabled him to circulate among the Better Sort, be favored b y them, and become one of them. Thomas Jefferson wa s "never happier than when . .. performing good offices fo r good people, and the most friendly office on e can perform i s to make worthy characters acquainted with one another." Worthy men needed good friends to disseminate their good names as well as to defen d their good names against "the assassin who stabs reputation." 20 Some founders ranke d reputatio n abov e law. For example, George Mason wrote George Washington abou t a young relative who killed his opponent i n an unlawfu l duel . The youn g ma n "ma y no t b e strictl y justifiable i n a legal sense [but ] I am entirely of the opinio n tha t h e has done n o mor e tha n an y man of sensibility and honor would have thought himself obliged to do under the same circumstances of provocation . . . a n attempt to blast the reputatio n of a young lad y o f family an d characte r allie d t o hi m b y the neares t tie s o f blood." The youth ha d t o protec t hi s reputatio n an d famil y hono r b y shedding blood. Alexander Hamilton (late r to die in a duel with Aaron Burr) emphasized th e importance o f duelists' proper conduct . A second t o John Lau rens in a duel with Charles Lee, Hamilton reported , "I t is a piece of justice to the two gentlemen t o declare that, afte r the y met, their conduct was strongly marked with al l the politeness, generosity, coolness , and firmness that ough t to characteriz e a transactio n o f thi s nature." 21 Bot h duelist s demonstrate d their manhood an d reinforced thei r good names. Many founders were obsessed with what other notable men said and wrote about them. Early in the Revolution, Washington worried that his reputation would "fall" if he continued his military command with too few soldiers only to be charged with incompetence , o r if he resigned his command onl y to b e attacked for disloyalty. He fretted about the "impossibility of serving with reputation" and instructed his cousin Lund to issue a "declaration made in credit

ii4 I The Better Sort and Leadership

to th e justice of my character." The founder s generall y considered men' s devotion to reputation less a matter of self-indulgence an d more a positive stimulus to virtue. Theophilus Parson s explained tha t a major reaso n public offi cials could b e trusted an d empowere d with authorit y was that thei r concer n for thei r "ow n reputation woul d guard them agains t undu e influence." They were unlikely to engage in deceit, dishonesty, or corruption because they knew that "th e censure of the people will hang on thei r neck s with th e weight o f a millstone."22 Concern fo r reputatio n als o was centra l t o discussion s abou t fre e expres sion. Benjamin Franklin wrote a satire favoring "liberty of the press" and "liberty of the cudgel"—the right of men to thrash anyone who unjustly attacke d their reputations. Franklin defended a free press but added, "If [it] means the liberty of affronting, calumniating , and defaming another, I, for my part, own myself willing to part with m y share of i t. . . and shal l cheerfully consen t t o exchange m y liberty o f abusing other s fo r th e privilege o f not bein g abuse d myself." Supporters o f a free press expected journalists to qualify libert y with civility. The y agree d wit h Washingto n tha t defamatio n wa s "incompatibl e with trut h an d manliness " a s well a s with Tuni s Wortman tha t defamatio n constituted "unmanl y . . . calumny." However, supporters of the Sedition Act did no t trus t journalists' truthfulnes s o r manhood. They demanded lega l restraints o n th e press, especially to protect politica l leaders' reputations. Suc h restraints, the y announced , wer e alarming onl y "t o slanderers, t o libelers , t o robbers of reputation." 23 Some founders considere d a man's reputation s o important tha t i t "ough t to be guarded as of the next consequence to his life." One reason was personal. Franklin wrote, "It is so natural to wish to be well spoken of, whether alive or dead." This desir e t o b e warmly remembere d wa s a part o f men' s ques t fo r symbolic immortality. Franklin used this insight to try to lure Washington t o France: "Yo u would, o n thi s sid e o f th e sea , enjo y th e grea t reputatio n yo u have acquired, pure and free from those little shades that the jealousy and envy of a man's countrymen an d contemporaries ar e ever endeavoring to cast over living merit. Here you would know and enjoy what posterity will say of Washington." Judit h Sargen t Murray' s "Gleaner " mad e reputatio n centra l t o th e very meanin g o f men' s live s an d deaths whe n declarin g hi s mos t cherishe d goals: "I would be distinguished and respected by my contemporaries; I would be continued on grateful remembranc e when I make my exit; and I would descend with celebrity to posterity." 24 A second reason was that many founders fel t men's concern for reputatio n helped moderat e thei r conduc t an d kee p it within th e boundaries o f propri-

The Better Sort and Leadership I 11 5

ety. Colonial protesters who participated i n mock funerals an d executions experienced considerable social pressure to maintain decoru m and order if they were to protect their good names. Many neutrals and Tories who remained in their communitie s durin g th e Revolutio n learne d t o spea k an d ac t wit h re straint, so that they might maintain sufficient respectabilit y to insulate themselves from publi c anger, humiliation, an d worse. Patriots who aspired to upward mobility and leadership positions sought to establish good civic reputations to gain th e respect and deferenc e o f friends, neighbors , and supporter s who otherwis e treasure d thei r manl y independenc e an d maintaine d skepti cism toward leadership and authority. 25 Another reason the founders dwelle d on reputation was that they saw it as a bond between citizens and leaders. Charles Pinckney argued that most men would trust leaders who "connect the tie of property with that of reputation." Noah Webste r though t tha t citizen s woul d pu t thei r confidenc e i n official s whose jealousy of their reputation s was a "guarantee" that the y would faith fully discharg e publi c duties . Pelatia h Webste r state d tha t lawmaker s mad e themselves "fit to be trusted and worthy of public confidence" when concer n for "persona l reputation s wit h al l th e eye s o f th e worl d o n them " induce d them t o exhibi t "noble , upright , an d worth y behavior. " Th e founder s wer e convinced that most men did not excel at manly sensibilities, candor, and civility; however, they believed that most men admired the few who did excel at manhood an d mos t me n woul d voluntaril y submi t t o manl y leader s wh o earned reputation s fo r gentility , integrity , civility , an d civi c virtue . Anni s Boudinot Stockto n capture d thi s belie f when sh e announce d tha t "th e fre e born" would resign their "native rights" only to "Men" 26

The Natural Aristocracy The men who filled the ranks of the Better Sort constituted what the founder s often considere d "th e natural aristocracy." Elizur Goodrich calle d the natura l aristocracy an "institution of heaven," designed by God to ensure that leaders with a "sincere regard to the public good" gained mens "cordial affection, ven eration, esteem, and gratitude." Most founders doubte d neither the existence of a natural aristocrac y no r it s significance fo r th e stabilit y o f the Republic . But man y founder s questione d whethe r th e language of natura l aristocrac y was appropriate i n a republic. Di d i t provid e a terminology tha t helpe d th e majority o f me n t o identif y th e trustworth y fe w an d entrus t authorit y t o them? O r wa s i t s o closel y associate d wit h Englis h corruptio n an d tyrann y

n6 I The Better Sort and Leadership

that, a s Gordon Woo d argues , the "destructio n o f aristocracy, includin g Jefferson's 'natura l aristocracy,' was the real American Revolution"? 27 Alexander Hamilto n stated , "Ther e are strong minds i n every walk of life that will rise superior to the disadvantages of situation and will command th e tribute due to their merit, not only from th e classes to which they particularly belong, bu t fro m th e society in general." At th e New York ratifying conven tion, he labeled these men "aristocrats. " Their leadershi p inspired "th e confi dence o f the people " fro m al l classes . Two day s later, Rober t Livingsto n re ferred to "the natural aristocracy" as a repository of men's virtue, wisdom, eminence, an d learning . H e asked , "Doe s a man posses s th e confidenc e o f his fellow citizen s for havin g done the m importan t services ? He is an aristocrat . Has he great integrity? Such a man will be greatly trusted. He is an aristocrat." Livingston tied the natural aristocracy to democracy by expressing a hope that Americans were all "men o f merit" an d "al l aristocrats." 28 For their part , an tifederalists affirme d th e conceptua l substanc e o f th e natura l aristocracy . Melancton Smit h state d tha t "th e autho r o f natur e ha s bestowe d o n som e greater capacities than o n others—birth , education , talents , and wealth, creating distinction s amon g me n a s visible an d o f a s much influenc e a s titles, stars, an d garters. " H e agree d tha t suc h me n constitute d a "natura l aristoc racy" tha t deserve d recognition , whic h the y woul d likel y receiv e becaus e "pride o f family , o f wealth , o f talent s . . . comman d influenc e an d respec t among the common people." The "Federal Farmer" wrote that a "few men of wealth and talent" constituted a natural aristocracy, and "Brutus" asserted the likelihood tha t "the natural aristocracy of the country will be elected." 29 Two divisive issues centered o n th e language of aristocracy and th e trust worthiness o f natura l aristocrats . First , federalist s ha d mixe d feeling s abou t using the language of natural aristocracy to identify and legitimize manly leaders. Many federalists avoided the language of aristocracy for fear that it would alienate potential supporters. Like James Wilson, they preferred t o characterize the new president as "the Man o f the People" rather than a natural aristocrat. However , som e federalist s used , refined , an d defende d th e languag e o f aristocracy, fo r example , whe n confronte d b y opponents ' charge s tha t sup porters o f ratificatio n wer e "monarch y men , militar y men , aristocrats , an d drones." They drew distinctions between Europe's "hereditary aristocrats," the critics' "phanto m aristocrats, " an d America' s "natura l aristocrats " wh o con tributed to the public good.30 Often, however , their distinctions were not particularly persuasiv e t o American me n steepe d i n th e rhetori c o f liberty an d equality against aristocracy. Second, federalist s an d antifederalist s debate d whether natura l aristocrat s

The Better Sort and Leadership I 11 7

were worthy o f mos t men' s trust . Federalist s argue d tha t natura l aristocrat s were trustworthy leaders and lawmakers. They were family me n loat h t o en gage in actions that might harm their posterity and gentlemen whose jealousy of their reputations allied them to the public good. Antifederalists contende d that natura l aristocrats , lik e al l men , wer e flawed beings . Samue l Brya n claimed that the y had a "love of domination ,, i n proportion t o their "talents, abilities, and superior acquirements. " Even those with "th e greatest purity of intention" were apt to become "instruments of despotism in the hands of the artful an d designing." Unfortunately, th e public was often blin d to their fail ings and yielded "an implicit assent to the opinions of those characters whose abilities ar e held i n th e highest esteem. " Som e antifederalists suggeste d tha t the "illustrious" were no "more free from error " than common me n but were more insensitive to people of modest means. Other antifederalists repeated the warning that the public was sometimes so "dazzled by the splendor of names as to run blindfolded int o what may be our destruction." 31 Most federalists and antifederalists did agree that Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, an d othe r framers o f th e Constitutio n wer e natura l aristocrats . Federalists argue d tha t thes e "distinguishe d worthies " favored ratificatio n an d the common man who respected them ought to favor ratification too , as well as "manfully oppose" those whose "wicked intent" was to destroy these great men s labors. Noah Webster emphasize d tha t "som e of the greatest me n i n America with the venerable FRANKLIN and the illustrious WASHINGTON at their head" had written the Constitution. They deserved public support. James Madison recognized that the Cramers' reputations were crucial to ratification: "Ha d th e Con stitution bee n framed b y an obscure individual instea d of the body possessing public respec t and confidence , ther e ca n b e no doub t t h a t . . . i t would hav e commanded little attention from most of those who now admire its wisdom."32 Antifederalists di d no t attac k Frankli n an d Washingto n fo r bein g aristo crats. At times, they even congratulated the American public on its propensity to honor these great men by associating their good names with worthy deeds. The mai n oppositio n tacti c wa s t o stres s individua l men s responsibilit y t o make independent judgments abou t th e Constitution whil e pointing out th e framers' flaws. Thomas Wait explaine d that , initially , " I loved Georg e Washington—I venerated Benjamin Franklin—and therefore concluded that I must love and venerate all the works of their hands." Soon, Wait realized that blin d veneration was a "violence of passion" more appropriate t o "European slaves" than t o "th e freemen o f America." H e consulte d manl y "candor," engage d i n "cool and impartial examination," and chose to oppose the Constitution. Bu t why did Americas great men support the Constitution? Bryan reminded read-

n8 I The Better Sort and Leadership ers that "the illustrious and highly revered Washington" was "fallible on a subject that must be in great measure novel to him." Moreover, his "unsuspicious zeal" for America along with the "honest mistaken zeal of a patriot" made him vulnerable to the "flagitious machination s of an ambitious junto."33 The conviction that the ranks of men were capped by a cadre of natural aristocrats who were mor e o r less trustworthy a s leaders o f men was ubiquitous throughout the founding era . As late as 1794, Noah Webster openly applauded the existence of the natural aristocracy and added that even "the most noisy democrat" demonstrate d a belief in "natura l aristocracy " when h e sought a "re spectable family" to take his son as an apprentice, inquired into the "family connections and fortune" of a sons or daughters proposed spouse, or rallied around the banner of "certain influential me n in the democratic clubs." In time, however, most founder s discovere d tha t the language of natural aristocrac y was so laden wit h emotiona l baggag e tha t i t could no t be used without controversy . John Adams learned by experience. Despite innumerable efforts t o distinguish hereditary from natural aristocracy, he was constantly on the defensive. In 1790, he felt compelled to explain that his assertion of the inevitability of "noble families" referred to "the natural and actual aristocracy" of talent and virtue. In 1791, he tried to counteract accusations that he supported aristocracy by writing Jefferson, "I f you suppose that I have ever had a design or desire of attempting to introduce a government o f king, lords , and commons, o r in othe r word s an hereditary executive or an hereditary senate, either into the government of the United States or that of any individual state in this country, you are wholly mistaken." Adams was still on the defensive in 1800, when critics continued to insist that his "principles would wrest the government from th e hands of the people" and substitute "hereditary power and hereditary privileges."34 Attacks o n me n who spoke th e language o f natura l aristocrac y o r who openly intimated its existence became quite vicious. William Mannings 1799 Key of Libertywas a vitriolic tract against the conspiracies of "the Few." Manning pai d homag e t o grea t me n whose wisdom , virtue , an d service earne d them publi c respect and trust. The problem with the natural aristocrac y was the "solemn truth that the higher a person is raised in stations of honor, power, and trust , the greater are his temptations t o do wrong." Eminent men s self ishness an d pride "creat e a sense of superiority" an d then a "hankering and striving after monarch y or aristocracy where the people have nothing to do in government bu t to support th e Few in luxury and idleness." This hankerin g was heightened when "leading men" felt they could "never receive compensation and honors enough from the people for their services" and urged the people "t o reverenc e an d respect " the m rathe r tha n "t o see for themselves." 35

The Better Sort and Leadership I 11 9

Manning asserted the temporality of all natural aristocracies and emphasize d their antagonism t o mens liberty. Unlike Manning , nearl y al l founder s believe d tha t th e Bette r Sort—b y whatever label—shoul d b e recognized, trusted , an d empowere d t o compen sate fo r commo n men' s passions , selfishness , an d parochialism b y leadin g them towar d fraterna l unit y an d exercisin g lawmaking authorit y ove r them . Legitimizing th e leadershi p o f the Bette r Sor t was an ongoin g challeng e because any justifying languag e that hinted a t the social or political superiorit y of a few men was sure to generate controversy. Thomas Jefferson believe d in a natural aristocracy founded on a few men's great virtue and talent, and he even considered it "the most precious gift of nature" for "the instruction, the trusts, and governmen t o f society." Nonetheless , h e understoo d tha t al l tal k abou t aristocracy, natura l o r not , wa s repugnant t o me n steepe d i n th e rhetori c o f "the equa l right s o f men. " Accordingly , h e advise d Georg e Washingto n t o refuse membership in the Society of the Cincinnati, which critics condemned as an aristocratic organization. 36 Alexander Hamilton came to recognize that the distance between men and their leaders in a republic could no t b e too grea t or too narrow . Men ha d t o feel clos e enough t o thei r leader s t o b e familiar wit h them , develo p trus t i n them, an d eventuall y rende r habitua l respec t an d obedienc e t o them . An d leaders ha d t o reinforc e publi c familiarit y an d trus t b y claimin g t o b e lik e other men. Simultaneously, leaders had to appear sufficiently elevate d and esteemed to merit men's respect and obedience. Advising Washington on precedent-setting etiquette for the first presidency, Hamilton stated, "Mens mind s are prepared fo r a pretty high ton e i n th e demeano r o f the Executive , bu t I doubt whether for so high a tone as in the abstract might be desirable. The notions of equality are yet in my opinion too general and too strong to admit of such a distance."37 The language of natural aristocracy proved to be too hightoned an d pu t to o muc h distanc e betwee n th e Bette r Sor t an d th e commo n man. Alternatively, the founders experimented with a rhetoric of fame and infamy that emphasized the close proximity of citizens and leaders even as it justified men' s deference t o hegemonic elites.

The Rhetoric of Fame and Infamy The founder s pu t "equality " a t th e hear t o f their revolutionar y creed : "Go d made al l mankind originall y equal" ; adul t son s were "equa l i n ran k t o thei r parents"; men i n society deserved "equa l esteem o r equal respect"; an d "gov -

120 I The Better Sort and Leadership

ernment wa s a political institution betwee n me n naturall y equal." They also suggested that American men were destined for equality. As individuals, they faced God s "tw o grea t levelers , deat h an d endles s retribution" ; a s a nation , they adopted " a gospel of equality and fraternity " an d encouraged "universa l redemption o f th e huma n race. " At th e sam e time , th e founder s wer e con vinced tha t me n wer e bor n unequa l an d die d unequal . John Adam s argue d that me n wer e born wit h varie d abilitie s and a "passion fo r distinction " tha t motivated the m t o achiev e superiority ove r others an d t o acquir e a celebrity that continued beyond the grave, where it "Adorns our hearse, and flatters our tombs."38 How did the founders reconcil e natural equality with the actual inequality represented by the Better Sort of man? The founders relie d on th e grammar of manhood t o discuss equality and inequality in the ranks of men. They conceptualized mal e equality as a function of patriarchal domination o f women, joint opposition t o unmanly vices associated with effeminac y an d marginality , an d suppor t fo r fraterna l socia bility an d wartim e solidarity . The y talke d abou t inequalit y a s a matte r o f men s varying efforts an d abilities to achieve high standards of manly refine ment, candor , civility , and reputability . I n late-eighteenth-centur y America , being a Family Man i n a patriarchal societ y conferre d dignit y an d justifie d citizenship; being a Family Man who exhibited grea t manly merit conferre d social status and legitimized leadership. The passion for distinctio n an d am bition wa s the drivin g forc e o f manly meri t an d th e ques t fo r fam e wa s it s highest expression . John Adams applaude d th e passion fo r distinctio n whe n i t urge d me n t o emulate noble ancestors and worthy contemporaries, but he feared i t when it fostered jealousy , envy, and als o "destructive factions , wasting seditions, an d bloody civi l war." Merc y Oti s Warren calle d men s desir e fo r distinctio n " a noble principle" with "benevolent effects"—except whe n it produced "morti fying instance s o f profligacy , tyranny , an d th e wanto n exercis e o f arbitrar y sway." John Stevens considered mens "ambition" a "noble passion" and "laudable desire" but worried that it sometimes stirred mens "insatiate lust of domination an d despotic sway." If many writers appreciated ambitio n a s a source of a "manly and martial spirit" and "heroism," others were quick to warn that ambition fo r "pomp , power, an d greatness " often corrupte d men , eve n "ou r better sort." 39 Judith Sargen t Murray' s mixe d belie f tha t manl y ambitio n wa s bot h " a noble principle" that was "productive of the most valuable consequences" and a "tim e server ready to answer the purpose of every base employer" reflecte d contested ideals of manhood. Ambitious young men were free to measure up

The Better Sort and Leadership I 12 1

to republican manhoo d b y establishing and governing families, perpetuatin g family dynasties , an d positionin g themselve s t o b e fondl y remembere d b y their children and neighbors. But they were also invited to measure up to aristocratic manhood b y fitting into fraternal society , earning an esteemed repu tation i n it , and positioning themselve s to be fondly remembere d b y men o f virtue and wisdom, if not by all posterity. Unfortunately, th e disorderly bachelor and th e deceiving demagogue were likely to be equally ambitious i n th e cause o f personal pleasur e an d powe r agains t fraterna l unit y an d th e publi c good. Bot h were self-made me n but , b y the founders' standards , neither was a true man . * u The highest objec t o f ambition wa s "fame." Fo r most founders, Douglas s Adair explains , a man ambitiou s fo r fam e wante d "t o mak e history " b y acquiring "the largest possible human audience " and imprinting "his name and his actions" in the minds of worthy men everywher e so that he was "never to be forgotten. " H e sough t "immortality " b y wa y o f "publi c service. " Davi d Ramsay considered fam e th e ultimate rewar d for me n "wh o stepped forwar d in th e cause of liberty." Georg e Washington admitte d tha t h e was driven b y ambition, reputation , an d especiall y fame . H e explaine d tha t "th e height o f my ambition " wa s "t o meri t th e approbatio n o f goo d an d virtuou s men. " Fame would be "full compensatio n fo r all my toils and suffering." Accordin g to Garry Wills, what mos t distinguishe d Washington fro m othe r leader s was his "willingnes s t o b e rewarde d only in fame. " Washington' s ques t fo r fam e made hi m lik e othe r men , bu t hi s willingness t o b e rewarde d onl y i n fam e made the "immortal Washington" into what William Emerson calle d "a man among men." If ordinary citizens identified with Washington "th e man," they adored Washington "th e man among men." Wills concludes that his fame became "a social glue . .. fo r the republic." 41 Occasionally, Washington' s colleague s sough t t o influenc e hi m b y posi tioning themselves as defenders o f his fame. For instance, James Madison opposed Washington's 1793 Proclamation of Neutrality. Madison did not directly criticize Washington or the Proclamation but argued instead that it was "mortifying" to the President and his friends that the Proclamation undermined his "fame" because it appeared to be "an assumption o f prerogative" that was not found i n th e Constitutio n bu t "copie d fro m a monarchical model. " Americans often too k it upon themselves to uphold Washington's fame. In a sermon celebrating th e Revolution , fo r example , Georg e Duffiel d calle d o n congre gants t o "le t th e illustriou s Washington . . . live perpetual i n th e mind s an d the praises of all." He enjoined hi s listeners to "aid feeble fame with her hun dred wings and tongues to proclaim his worth; and . . . convey down throug h

122 I The Better Sort and Leadership

every age the unsullied remembrance of the patriot, the hero, and citizen combined, an d delive r hi s nam e an d hi s prais e t o th e unbounde d ocea n o f im mortal esteem." 42 The rhetori c o f fame wa s als o applie d t o mor e ordinar y officials . Danie l Shute proclaimed that men's reward for the "faithful an d intrepid execution of the duties of their offices" was the chance to "transmit their names with honor to posterity who, in futurity, wil l participate in the blessing." Phillips Payson noted that mens faith in public officials was justified b y magistrates' ambition "of transmitting their names to posterity with characters of immortal honor. " During the constitutional ratificatio n debates , Madison resurrecte d the argument tha t citizen s coul d safel y entrus t authorit y t o electe d official s wh o sought fam e throug h publi c service. Other federalist s relie d on th e desire fo r fame to build a case for a powerful presidency . Gouverneur Morris opposed a single-term presidency because it would "destroy the great incitement to merit public estee m b y takin g awa y th e hop e o f bein g rewarde d wit h reappoint ment," perhap s "shu t th e civil road t o glory," and compe l ambitiou s me n t o seek fame "b y the sword " rathe r tha n b y public service . Hamilton, agreein g that "love of fame" was "the ruling passion of the noblest minds," argued that presidents shoul d hav e unlimited term s o f office t o enable them t o seek and achieve fame . Pere s Fobe s adde d tha t official s wer e mos t trustworth y whe n they were "fire d wit h a noble emulatio n o f transmitting thei r name s t o posterity in laurels of honor." 43 The rhetoric of fame reserved its highest honors for leaders and lawmakers, but i t als o offere d degree s o f immortalit y t o mor e ordinar y men . Duffield' s celebratory sermon first praised Washington and then his fallen officers b y instructing, "Number them not of the dead. They are enrolled in the list of glory and fame , an d shal l liv e immortal , beyon d th e deat h o f th e grave. " Next , Duffield widene d the scope of remembrance by stating, "From the comman der in chief down to the faithful centinel , let the officer an d soldier who have bravely offere d thei r live s an d nobl y dare d deat h an d dange r i n th e blood y field . .. b e remembered wit h kindness. " Sometimes, eve n me n who fough t for libert y bu t faile d coul d expec t thei r shar e o f fame . A n admire r tol d th e Pennsylvania minorit y tha t los t it s struggl e agains t ratification , "W e rejoic e that your names will shine illustriously in the pages of history and will be read with honor and grateful remembranc e in the annals of fame."44 Fame trickled down fro m th e Bette r Sor t o f men t o mor e ordinar y me n an d thereb y nar rowed the distance between them . The rhetori c o f fam e als o helpe d clos e th e ga p betwee n loft y politica l rhetoric and everyda y personal experience because its glowing terms were fa-

The Better Sort and Leadership I 12 3 miliar an d friendl y t o commo n men . Fe w individuals achieve d fam e b y bein g great leaders and publi c officials, bu t ever y family man sough t "fame " by wishing t o b e remembere d b y hi s descendants . Orator s playe d o n thi s point . I n a July 4 speech , Simeo n Baldwi n recalle d "th e son s o f freedom " wh o wit h "manly firmness" withstoo d Britis h tyrann y an d transmitte d "thei r names , their virtues, and thei r nobl e deed s t o posterity , b y whom the y will be revere d as th e mos t distinguishe d benefactor s o f mankin d an d eminen t example s fo r future generations. " Baldwi n the n linke d thes e grea t warrior s t o America s family men , wh o di d thei r nobl e shar e t o provid e fo r "th e protectio n o f thei r estates, families, persons , fame , an d lives." 45 The rhetori c o f fame justifie d in equality i n th e rank s o f men, bu t i t also reinforced Americans ' sens e of share d manhood. The familiarit y o f fam e free d i t fro m th e baggag e weighing dow n th e lan guage o f natural aristocracy . Mos t me n o f distinguishe d birt h o r grea t wealt h did no t achiev e fame , bu t som e me n o f humbl e origin s (suc h a s Benjami n Franklin) wer e numbere d amon g th e famous . Joh n Steven s expresse d th e equal opportunit y idio m o f fame a s follows : No government that has ever yet existed in the world affords s o ample a field to individuals of all ranks for the display of political talents and abilities. Here are no patrician s who engros s the offices o f state. No ma n wh o has real merit, le t his situatio n b e wha t i t will , nee d despair . H e first distinguishe s himsel f amongst hi s neighbor s an d townshi p an d countr y meeting ; h e i s next sen t t o the state legislature. In this theater his abilities, whatever they are, are exhibited in their tru e colors, and displayed t o the views of every man i n the state; fro m hence his ascent to a seat in Congress. . . . Such a regular uninterrupted grada tion fro m th e chief men i n a village to the chair of the President of the Unite d States, which thi s government afford s t o all her citizens without distinction , is a perfectio n i n republica n governmen t heretofor e unknow n an d unprece dented.46 Ambitious me n wh o sough t distinctio n ha d t o underg o a trial b y political or deal t o achiev e fame . Lik e th e Jeffersonia n educationa l syste m intende d t o "rake . . . from th e rubbish " thos e who prove d themselve s "th e bes t geniuses, " republican politic s provide d tiere d test s o f manhoo d t o separat e th e les s de serving man y fro m th e meritoriou s fe w wh o wer e sufficientl y trustworth y t o lead me n an d wiel d politica l authority. 47 Of course , th e founder s wer e greatl y concerne d tha t me n s quest fo r fam e could b e perverte d b y "th e bol d effronter y o f thos e intereste d an d avariciou s adventurers fo r plac e who , intoxicate d wit h th e idea s o f distinctio n an d preferment, hav e prostrated ever y worthy principl e beneat h th e shrin e o f am -

124 I The Better Sort and Leadership

bition." Merc y Otis Warren believe d such me n wer e more tha n malevolent ; they were also foolhardy becaus e they exposed themselves to the eternal pain of "infamy." The gramma r o f manhood suggeste d tha t a worthy person preferred a manly deat h t o infamy . Davi d Ramsa y recounte d a battle i n whic h George Washington exposed himself to the enemy "as if in an expectation that by an honorable death he might escap e the infamy h e dreaded from th e dastardly conduct of troops on whom he could place no dependence." It was terrible t o di e forgotten ; bu t i t wa s wors e t o b e eternall y remembere d a s a scoundrel lik e Benedic t Arnold, wh o woul d b e foreve r associate d wit h "th e blackest crimes" of "treason" and "patricide." 48 The founders thought that mens dread of infamy provided a modest guarantee of their integrity and leadership. A pretender to popularity would think twice abou t deceivin g othe r me n becaus e his self-aggrandizement migh t b e exposed an d ope n hi m t o humiliating charge s of infamy. A respectable offi cial would be a cautious decision maker lest he make serious mistakes that invited infamy . Tha t wa s Benjami n Franklin s warnin g t o Lor d How e shortl y after the British went to war with its colonies: "I consider this war . .. a s both unjust an d unwise; and I am persuaded cool dispassionate posterity will condemn t o infam y thos e wh o advise d it ; an d tha t eve n succes s will no t sav e from som e degree of dishonor those who voluntarily engaged to conduct it. " Finally, a trul y worth y leade r woul d endur e significan t self-sacrific e rathe r than ris k infam y fo r himsel f an d hi s love d ones . Whe n Genera l Horati o Gates los t a ke y battle , h e immediatel y tendere d a "manl y resignation " t o avert infamy . An d whe n Henr y Laurens , imprisone d b y th e Britis h fo r hi s role in th e Revolution , wa s offered a pardon i n retur n fo r a public apology , he declared, "I will never subscribe to my own infamy and to the dishonor of my children." 49 The founder s conceptualize d "th e lov e o f fame " a s a manly motivatio n and compelling justification fo r free and equal men to aspire to membership among the Better Sort and to recognize, respect, and obey the leadership o f the Better Sort. Fame was the carrot. The many men who sought it and th e few wh o partoo k o f i t wer e entice d b y posterity' s gratefu l remembrance . Thus, Gouverneu r Morri s eulogize d Alexande r Hamilto n b y instructin g mourners, " I charg e you t o protec t hi s fame—it i s all he ha s left." Infam y was th e stick . I t poke d an d prodde d ambitiou s me n t o avoi d disgrac e an d humiliation b y disciplining thei r passions, exercising liberty with restraint , and sustainin g orde r i n th e rank s o f men. Me n wh o misdirecte d thei r am bitions potentially mutilate d themselve s with " a deep and . . . lasting mar k of infamy." 50

The Better Sort and Leadership I 12 5

Fraternity and Fratricide Many men tested their masculinity, cultivated refinement, establishe d reputations, an d sough t fam e b y participating i n fraternitie s tha t joine d norm s o f self-improvement an d social civility to more-or-less intricate ranking systems. For example, "Shopkeepers, traders, and merchants bonded into clubs and societies" tha t fostere d "mutua l consideration, " "mutua l benevolence, " an d "friendly feeling. " Membership was often a tryout for socia l fit and mobility . Apprentice printers and artisans complied with craft norms as a means to survive and advance . Apprentice status provide d th e contras t neede d t o bolste r masters' socia l standing "b y highlighting th e value of craft skills , the signifi cance of training, and the achievement of manly respectability through work." In the legal fraternity that emerged in the late eighteenth century, aspiring and new lawyers were expected to excel at "responsible manhood" to establish their place in the profession. The "manl y advocate" could anticipate moving up in the ranks. 51 John Adams was a master psychologist of fraternal life. He argued that men first sought to fit into social groups and then to rise above their peers: "Every man desire s not onl y the consideration o f others but he frequently compare s himself with others . . . and in proportion a s he exults when he perceives that he has more of it than they , he feels a keener affliction whe n he sees that on e or more of them ar e more respected tha n himself. " Adams's mix of fraterna l membership an d hierarchica l statu s aptl y describe d Freemasonry . Benjami n Franklin wrote of his fellow Masons, "They speak a universal language and act as a passport t o th e attentio n an d suppor t o f the initiate d i n al l parts of th e world.... They have made men of the most hostile feelings and most distant religions and most diversified conditions rush to the aid of each other and feel social joy and satisfaction tha t they have been able to afford relie f to a brother Mason." Freemasonr y couple d internationa l fraterna l equality t o a complex ranking system that challenge d member s t o demonstrate manhoo d an d ear n elevated status by performing prescribe d deed s and secret rituals. All Masons were brethren bu t some, like George Washington, demonstrate d exceptiona l merit and earned elevated status. 52 Freemasonry opened its meritocracy to most white men. Mary Ann Clawson suggests that it helped to "deny the significance of class difference" b y creating a "kin-lik e bond " amon g member s an d leaders . Masoni c lodge s wer e quite popular among veteran soldiers and officers, providin g them an oppor tunity to perpetuate martial fraternities an d hierarchies in peacetime. DeWit t Clinton claime d tha t Freemasonr y procreate d a n "artificia l consanguinity "

126 I The Better Sort and Leadership

that operate d wit h "a s muc h forc e an d effec t a s th e natura l relationshi p o f blood." The ideal Mason was an extended family man who would sacrifice individual interes t and even family aggrandizement t o promote fraterna l good . His willingness to cooperate with a fellow Mason rather than compete against him i n th e marketplace helpe d "moderat e th e excesses of the emerging capitalist system. " Gordo n Woo d concludes , "Freemasonr y . . . repudiate d th e monarchical hierarch y of family an d favoritism an d created a new hierarchical order that reste d on 'rea l worth an d personal merit' alon g with 'brotherl y affection an d sincerity.'" 53 Two of the most controversial fraternities o f the founding er a were the Society of the Cincinnati founded in the 1780s and the Democratic Societies that proliferated i n the 1790s. The Cincinnati was an exclusive "society of friends." Membership wa s limite d t o forme r officer s an d inheritabl e b y thei r oldes t sons. Its ideology was that postrevolutionary America was threatened b y disorder i n the ranks of men an d Cincinnat i member s were responsible for fos tering "libert y without anarchy. " Genera l Henr y Kno x believe d th e Cincin nati wa s "th e onl y ba r t o lawles s ambition an d dreadfu l anarchy. " Member s played key roles in quelling Shays's Rebellion, promoting the U.S. Constitution, and sustaining the memory of "immortals." One manifestation o f their immortalizing mission was the practice of naming their sons after war heroes, as i n Georg e Washingto n Cobb , Horati o Gate s Cook , Willia m Augustu s Steuben North , Henr y Kno x Hall , Rufu s Putna m Stone , an d Alexande r Hamilton Gibbs. 54 Critics condemne d th e Cincinnat i a s a n aristocratic , factiona l organiza tion. Benjami n Frankli n an d Merc y Otis Warren argue d tha t member s were infected b y a n env y fo r monarch y an d aristocrac y durin g thei r associatio n with Washington' s Europea n office r corps . Jefferson describe d member s a s "monocrats" and suggested that the Society was "carving out for itself hereditary distinctions, hovering over our Constitutio n eternally , meetin g togethe r in all parts of the Union, periodically with closed doors, accumulating capital in their separate treasury, corresponding secretly and regularly . .. t o suppress the friends of general freedom." I f Jefferson sa w the Cincinnati as an elitist secret society , William Mannin g portraye d th e Cincinnat i a s a self-consciou s power elite conspiring to rule the "swinish multitude."55 Critics focused on its exclusiveness, hereditary membership policy, questionable intentions, and destructive effects . By contrast, Jefferso n praise d th e Democrati c Societie s a s champion s o f men's right s an d "th e republican principle s o f our Constitution. " These fra ternities opposed "the chains of customs and outworn creeds" to support poli-

The Better Sort and Leadership I 12 7

cies aimed at greater equality, penal reform, public education, women's rights, and antislavery and democratic politics. Henry May suggests that the Democratic Societies generally "stoppe d shor t o f advocating any sweeping changes in existing institutions in the American republic." Their primary purpose was to encourage "the vigilance of the people" in order to preserve and protect liberty. Manning proposed a continental version of the Democratic Societies in his pla n t o creat e a nationa l "Societ y o f th e Many " tha t woul d appl y th e Cincinnati's organizationa l acume n fo r democrati c ends . H e wrote , "I f th e Many were one-quarter part so well organized as the order of Cincinnati. . . , they would always carry their points in elections—being in numbers so vastly superior." Onc e organized an d empowered , th e common peopl e would hav e little cause to promote social and political disorder. 56 David Osgoo d an d other s saw the Democratic Societie s as groups o f men whose passions were inflamed "to a degree of fury" by "demagogues well skilled in the business of faction." Noa h Webster excoriated these "self-created" soci eties for lawless violence and belittled their members for sacrificing "indepen dence of mind" to become "dupes of other men." Alexander Hamilton calle d the Democratic Societies the "Grecian horse to a republic"; they praised liberty but practiced licentiousness. Washington thought they were "instituted by artful and designing" schemers "to impede the measures of government" and "destroy the confidence which is necessary for the people to place . .. i n their public servants."57 The critics emphasized members' unmanly slavishness, leaders' licentious demagoguery, and the groups' divisive impact on society. If fraternalis m promise d mal e solidarit y an d order , actua l fraternitie s a s well a s emerging politica l partie s seeme d t o produc e factiona l conflict s an d fratricidal tendencies . That was why President Washington argued that Americans shoul d submerg e thei r pett y difference s an d identif y wit h th e on e na tional brotherhoo d born e o f constitutiona l government . H e use d th e sam e reasoning to convince Secretaries Hamilton and Jefferson t o set aside their differences fo r th e greater good of the administration, government , an d nation . A few years later, President Jefferson wa s the one seeking to counteract men' s fraternal prejudices , party factionalism, an d fratricidal tendencie s by reminding American me n tha t they were all "brethren o f the same principles." 58

One National Brotherhood On on e plane of analysis, most founder s coul d imagin e that th e stigmatize d but redeemable Bachelor, the meritorious but parochial Family Man, and the

128 I The Better Sort and Leadership

reputable but ambitious Better Sort of man provided a manly foundation fo r a unified , orderly , stabl e republic . Brutis h me n woul d b e restrained an d re formed. Responsibl e father s woul d provisio n an d protec t families , gover n women, and perform th e basic functions o f citizenship. Many men would aspire to leadership, but only the trustworthy few would be empowered to serve as leaders and lawmakers. Consensual norms of manhood would bind American citizens and their leaders into one national brotherhood . James Madiso n suggeste d tha t th e ga p betwee n ordinar y me n an d thei r leaders might be narrowed in time. The Family Man was likely to become less parochial an d mor e cosmopolitan whe n participatin g i n elections . His views would b e refine d an d enlarge d "b y passin g the m throug h th e mediu m o f a chosen bod y o f citizens whose wisdom ma y best discer n th e tru e interes t o f their countr y an d whose patriotism an d lov e of justice will be least likely to sacrifice i t to temporary or partial considerations." A more sophisticated citizenry would be less apt to be deceived by demagogues and more likely to elect to public office me n of real worth. Gradually, voters would develop a "manly confidence" in public officials who were from th e people but "particularly distinguished" among them as contributors to the "dearest interests of the country." Relatedly , Edmun d Randolp h suggeste d tha t consen t o f th e governe d registered through a national electoral process would encourage a sense of "fellow-feeling" between the farmers who comprised the bulk of the citizenry and the lawmakers chosen "by and from th e people" to represent them. 59 Madison argue d tha t men s sense of fellow feeling would b e reinforced b y constitutional guarantees that leaders could "make no law which will not have its full operatio n o n themselves and their friends a s well as on the great mass of society." He called this one of "the strongest bonds by which human policy can connec t th e ruler s an d peopl e together. " Alexande r Hamilto n heartil y agreed. The principl e tha t legislator s an d citizen s wer e oblige d t o obe y th e same laws sounded "true and . . . strong chords of sympathy between the representative and the constituent." In addition, Hamilton believed that national fraternal bond s woul d b e fortifie d b y tie s o f "commo n interest " tha t urge d manufacturers an d mechanic s t o view the merchan t a s "their natura l patro n and friend, " landholder s t o recogniz e a shared "natura l interest " agains t ex cessive taxation , an d member s o f th e learne d profession s t o gai n th e confi dence of all classes. Ultimately, common interest would be "the surest bond of sympathy" between voters and an elected government staffed b y "landholders, merchants, and men of the learned professions." 60 On anothe r plane of analysis, however, most founders doubte d that frater nal unity between citizens and leaders was sufficient t o ensure enduring order

The Better Sort and Leadership I 12 9

in the ranks of men and lasting stability for the Republic. A strong bond between th e Famil y Ma n an d th e Bette r Sor t may hav e provide d a sufficien t foundation fo r republica n governmen t i n ordinary times. But most founder s were convinced that they lived in extraordinary times. They daily encountered uncertainties, exigencies, emergencies, and crises that aroused citizens' furiou s passions; and the y beheld unprecedente d opportunitie s t o guide, shape, an d improve a future that demanded more wisdom and virtue than even reputable leaders an d lawmaker s coul d muster . Neede d i n extraordinar y time s wer e a few heroic men who could neutralize the people s unruly passions and inspire public suppor t fo r innovativ e measure s tha t promise d a bette r futur e fo r America and all posterity. Writing as "Solon, Junior," David Howell suggested that the destiny of the Republic ultimatel y depende d o n th e action s o f a fe w extraordinar y men . How di d Americ a wi n th e Revolution ? Howel l answered , "Durin g th e wa r and whil e tha t wa s the rag e of the day , was not a n ac t passe d puttin g ever y freeman i n the state under martial law to be inflicted b y a general over whom even th e Legislature had n o control ? Yet the people bor e it—and thos e who complained o f it being unconstitutional wer e answered tha t th e safety o f the people is the highest law." Great generals who stood above positive law led the Revolution an d mos t patriot s followe d them . Now , what were the prospect s for th e ne w U.S . Constitution ? Howel l argued , "Whateve r th e ne w federa l Constitution i s in itself, its administration i s all that ca n ever affect th e people."61 Howell s insight an d th e founders' sacre d truth wa s that th e future o f the Republi c depende d no t simpl y o n citize n consen t t o worthy lawmaker s and laws but also on citizen compliance with th e great authority and extralegal prerogative of a few heroic men.

6 The Heroi c Man an d National Destin y

The founder s agree d tha t "la w ought t o b e king." The proble m was that la w was a blunt instrumen t fo r resistin g men's democratic passions, reforming thei r moral s and manners , and maintainin g orde r amon g them as well a s for resolvin g national crise s and realizin g historic opportunities . La w was slow , cumbersome , an d rigid , bu t th e time s tha t trie d men s soul s de manded quick thinking and creative action. Law reflected "a n excess of popularity" rathe r tha n excellenc e i n manl y virtu e an d vision . La w mirrore d th e prejudices o f "pygmies " who lacke d th e "cando r an d unbiase d mind s a s becomes men," no t th e integrity and charism a of "giants" who sought politica l "manhood" b y "rigorou s measures, " regarde d "th e publi c goo d mor e tha n their own humor," and established hegemony to procreate a republic of men. Unfortunately, giant s wer e rare . Georg e Washingto n repeatedl y asked , "Where are our men of abilities?"1 The founder s sa w everyday politics as a matter o f restraining and reform ing th e Bachelor , trustin g th e Famil y Ma n wit h citizenship , an d entrustin g leadership an d lawmaking to the Better Sort ; but the y also felt th e Republi c needed trul y exceptiona l me n t o lead th e natio n t o it s destiny. They sough t to identif y an d empowe r th e Heroi c Ma n an d thereb y reinforce d th e con tested idea l o f the traditiona l patriarch . The Heroi c Ma n wa s a national fa ther figure who require d manl y independenc e an d patriarcha l discretio n t o defy la w an d resis t publi c opinio n withou t forsakin g popula r consent . Women to o coul d b e heroic, bu t onl y i n a secondary sense . Judith Sargen t Murray thought women's "heroism canno t b e surpassed" and Thomas Pain e wanted "som e Jersey maid" to emulate Joan of Arc to "spirit up her country men"; but Murray' s women mostl y succored male warriors an d Pain e s maid shamed recalcitrant men into combat. These heroines were what Teresa Brennan and Carole Pateman refer to as "auxiliaries to the commonwealth." Ulti mately, th e founders ' fait h i n th e Heroi c Ma n complete d thei r gramma r o f manhood by promoting a patriarchal discourse that lifted u p a few great men 130

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 13 1

over the democrati c masse s and playe d dow n women' s political potentia l a s citizens and leaders. 2

A Few Great Men The founder s consistentl y describe d thei r immediat e circumstance s i n th e idiom o f crisis , contingency , emergency , exigency , expediency , fortune , an d necessity. The urgency of their terminology informed thei r belief that the extraordinary threats , challenges , an d opportunitie s o f their time s beckone d a few great men to step forward; assum e positions of leadership, authority, an d power; and preside over the course of national affairs. The ubiquitous rhetori c of liberty and equality continued to cast suspicion on concentrated power but, most founders believed , the initiative and influence o f some heroic men were essential for achievin g Americas destin y as a model republi c and world-clas s nation. American intellectuals drew ideals of political heroism from thinker s ranging from Plat o to Plutarch but especially from Lor d Bolingbroke's The Idea of a Patriot King. A Patriot Kin g was a majestic leade r who governe d "lik e th e common father " whos e "true image of a free people " was "a patriarchal fam ily." He ha d a "love of liberty," and h e defended an d extende d libert y to his national family . H e displaye d affectio n towar d citizen s an d exhibite d clemency b y reforming rathe r tha n exactin g retribution fro m hi s "rebelliou s children." Importantly, he epitomized manhood. He acted with "decency and grace," refused flattery and resisted factionalism, practice d manly virtues, and avoided vices "unworthy of men," such as the libertinism and adultery associated with Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Augustus Caesar. His manly efforts earne d him a "true popularity" that enabled him to rule on the basis of widespread consent , ensurin g tha t h e would b e "reverence d an d obeyed " i n life and accorded "fame after death." 3 Prior to the Revolution, Americans called on George III to play the part of a Patriot King who protected colonial liberty against corrupt officials. Initially , colonial writers approved of royal and parliamentary prerogative, even as they protested particular laws and policies. "On som e emergencies," wrote Daniel Dulany, "the King . . . hath an absolute power to provide for the safety of the state . . . like a Roman dictator. " Thomas Fitc h adde d tha t "reason s of state" and "necessity " legitimize d Parliament s authorit y t o b e "suprem e directo r over all His Majesty's dominions. " Americans mostly assumed the legitimacy of political prerogative but pleaded with both king and Parliament to exercise

132 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

it o n thei r behalf . When Parliamen t continue d t o enac t controversia l mea sures, colonists looked to the king to rein in Parliament. Even after bloo d was shed at Lexington an d Concord , member s of the Continental Congres s professed t o be King George's "loyal and dutiful subject s . . . still ready with ou r lives and fortunes t o defend hi s person, crown, and dignity" when he asserted his prerogative against "his evil ministry." 4 Simultaneously, American s questione d whethe r Englis h ruler s exercise d their powers properly and effectively. Di d they make laws and exercise discretion to achieve the good of the empire or the good of England at the expense of the colonies ? Were the y proximat e enoug h t o th e colonie s t o understan d and resolv e loca l crises ? American s proteste d abuse s o f prerogativ e an d in voked local crises to justify colonial authority. Richard Bland and Oxenbridg e Thatcher claime d tha t "sudde n emergencies " i n th e colonie s justifie d th e transfer o f British authorit y t o American official s wh o were more intimatel y acquainted with the colonial landscape and better positioned t o act with dispatch. Whe n Parliamen t rejecte d thes e claims , Americans calle d o n "neces sity" to legitimiz e illega l protests. Mercy Otis Warren spok e of "laws of selfpreservation" to justify a Boston Tea Party that otherwise was an unwarranted "attack upon private property," and David Ramsay called on "the great law of self-preservation" t o support "th e destruction o f the tea." The founders regu larly invoked exigency to legitimize patriot prerogative to break existing laws in the cause of defending liberty. 5 By 1776, Americans denounced kingship , royal prerogative, and executiv e authority as tyrannical but , a s Ralph Ketcham observes , "The clou d tha t descended ove r executive power . . . did no t entirel y obscure the practices an d tradition of active leadership that had been both dominant and admired in the more tha n 15 0 years since the foundin g o f the first colonies." George Washington promoted active leadership. He argued that military and civilian leaders had a duty to exercise "extensive powers" in difficult times . Accordingly, he reminded Joseph Reed that Pennsylvania had vested him with martial-law authority "t o tak e suc h measure s a s th e exigenc y ma y demand. " H e enjoine d Reed "t o exert the powers entrusted t o you with a boldness and vigor suite d to the emergency" and assured him tha t "th e popular mind " was prepared t o comply by making "sacrifices both of ease and property." 6 In a republic, powerful leadershi p was justifiable an d desirable on th e basis of exigency and an ticipated public support. Claims of exigency often elicite d public support. A declared crisis aroused public anxiety and encouraged men to seek strong leaders to resolve the crisis and reduce their anxiety. The public s demand for great leadership invited am-

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 13 3

bitious men t o prove themselves heroes by displaying the virtuous manhoo d needed to master fortune and make history. Katherine Auspitz reminds us that the Lati n roo t o f virtue is vir, which connote s "manlines s o r prowess. " The Heroic Man exhibite d manl y prowess. He disciplined his passions and inter ests "to take events into his own hands and shape them according to his own will." Often, h e sacrificed persona l pleasure, family prosperity , an d socia l respectability to protect liberty and secure order against "the flux, wildness, and frenzy of fortune." Alexander Hamilton exhibite d manly prowess by refusin g to make "an unmanly surrender" t o love. He left hi s new wife at home so he could follow the path of public service. Nathanael Greenes military victory at Eutaw Spring s als o exemplifie d manl y prowess . Washington wrot e t o him , "Fortune mus t hav e been co y indeed ha d sh e not yielded a t last to s o persevering a pursuer as you have been. I hope now that she is yours she will change her appellatio n o f fickle to tha t o f constant." The Heroi c Man s prowes s required his separation fro m wome n an d his conquest of the disorderly femal e forces affiliated wit h fortune. 7 Earning public respect was one thing; ensurin g public obedience was another. The founder s distruste d powerfu l men . They led a rebellion agains t a king, kingship , an d consolidate d authority ; the y frame d stat e constitution s that limited executive authority and a U.S. Constitution tha t fragmented po litical power. They cultivated what Joyce Appleby calls "a culture of constitutionalism" that endorsed the "voluntary sphere of action" but limited the public sphere. 8 Still, the founders ofte n represse d thei r impulse t o limit politica l authority. They suspende d skepticis m o f powerfu l leader s whenever a crisis called forth the Heroic Man to save the nation and secure its destiny. Most notably, their distrust melted away each time that Washington agreed to assume the helm o f public affairs. H e was widely perceived a s a man amon g men, a hero wh o avoide d corruptio n an d performe d grea t servic e because , lik e Moses, he was inspired by God and chosen by acclaim. Washington surveye d "the road which providence has pointed us to so plainly" and led voluntary legions of American men into the republican future. 9 The Heroic Man had a complex relationship to law. John Adams saw him as a patriot wh o sough t t o establis h " a government o f laws and no t o f men" but also as a leader who knew that the way to secure a government of laws was "to depute powe r fro m th e many to a few o f the mos t wise and good. " Th e road to impersonal politic s was paved b y a few heroic personalities. Thomas Jefferson agreed . A great leader supported th e rule of law but recognized tha t exigencies and opportunities might demand extralegal initiatives: "A strict observance of the laws is doubtless on e of the high dutie s . . . but i t i s not th e

134 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

highest." The Heroic Man had to ignore law and risk infamy "o n great occasions when th e safety of the nation o r some of its very highest interests are at stake." Jefferson too k tha t ris k t o acquir e th e Louisian a Territory. H e acte d "beyond the Constitution" ou t of a sense of paternal duty. It was "the case of a guardian investing the money of his ward in purchasing an important adja cent territory and saying to him when o f age, I did this for your good; I pretend n o righ t t o bin d you ; yo u ma y disavo w m e an d I mus t ge t ou t o f th e scrape as I can; I thought i t my duty to risk myself for you." Jefferson hope d to open up farmland fo r family men and to secure the Mississippi Valley with "our own brethren and children" rather than "strangers of another family." He was convinced that his actions would "confirm an d not weaken the Constitution" by promoting the public good and winning mens eventual consent. 10 Most founders fel t that the elevation of great leaders above legitimate laws during moment s o f crisis and opportunit y promise d multipl e payoffs . First , the Heroic Man exhibited what R. W. Connell calls "the public face of hegemonic masculinity." H e modele d independen t manhood. 11 Hi s publi c exhibition o f manly prowess heightened othe r mens awareness of their own masculine shortcoming s an d encourage d the m t o striv e fo r mal e maturity . Hi s manly languag e an d masterfu l deed s provide d criteri a b y which mos t me n could measure , judge, and rat e one another. Hi s public persona as a self-disciplined ma n wh o transcende d persona l prejudices , parochia l loyalties , an d factional politics fostered a sense of fraternal solidarit y and national pride that bound men together. One truly exceptional man could be crucial for curbin g male licentiousness, ordering the ranks of men, and encouraging fraternal har mony. Second, the founders' faith in the Heroic Man who wielded extensive powers during difficult time s reinforced traditiona l patriarchalism . Continuin g a line of thought running from Plato through Bacon and Machiavelli to the present, th e founder s perpetuate d th e ide a that a great leade r separate d himsel f from wome n an d conquered antagonisti c female forces. H e kept women a t a distance t o avoi d distraction , temptation , an d seductio n fro m publi c duty . That explained why General Howe was no great leader. Thomas Paine scorned Howe for capturing Philadelphia onl y to hide "among women an d children " in the city rather than pursue a dispirited American army across the countryside. A manly leader lef t wome n behind ; the n h e took th e initiativ e t o con quer effeminate vice s and fickle fortune. Fo r instance, President Washington made "manly" overtures to strengthen U.S. relations with Great Britain by issuing an extralegal Proclamation of Neutrality and by pursuing treaty options with th e Crow n whe n America s allianc e wit h Franc e wa s unsettle d b y th e

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 13 5 French Revolution . Alexande r Hamilto n denounce d Washington' s critic s fo r harboring a "womanis h attachmen t t o France." 12 The Heroi c Ma n wa s a pa triarch wh o exercise d authorit y i n oppositio n t o wome n an d womanhood . Third, a few exceptiona l me n actin g i n concer t coul d procreat e a new na tion fo r posterity . Th e framer s o f th e Constitutio n sa w themselve s a s fertil e men (demigods ) wh o resolve d a nationa l crisi s b y bringin g fort h a ne w re public. The y di d no t dwel l o n mundan e matter s o f du e proces s an d lawfu l conduct. Edmun d Randolp h explained , "Ther e ar e certainl y season s o f a pe culiar natur e where ordinar y caution s mus t b e dispensed with, an d thi s i s certainly on e o f them. " Washingto n agreed . Anticipatin g th e Constitutiona l Convention, h e admitte d tha t i t "ma y no t b e legal " an d eve n suggeste d tha t Congress give it legal coloring "without proceedin g to a definition o f the pow ers." After th e convention , Washingto n predicte d tha t th e "transien t circum stances an d fugitiv e performance s whic h attende d thi s crisis " woul d b e for gotten, whil e th e nobl e principle s tha t informe d th e Constitutio n woul d merit "th e notic e o f posterity." 13 I n th e interim , federalist s ha d t o legitimiz e the plannin g proces s an d plan s fo r a new nationa l republic . Federalists use d th e languag e o f crisi s t o justif y thei r rol e a s heroic leader s who ende d on e governmen t an d originate d another . John Ja y explained : They who have turned their attention t o the affairs o f men must have perceived that ther e ar e tide s i n them , tide s very irregula r i n thei r duratio n an d seldo m found t o ru n twic e exactly in th e same manner o r measure. To discern an d t o profit b y these tides in national affairs i s the business of those who preside over them, and they that have had much experience on this head inform u s that there frequently ar e occasions when days , nay, even when hours, are precious. . .. A s in the field, so in the cabinet, ther e are moments t o be seized as they pass, and they who preside in either should be left i n capacity to improve them. 14 Jay argued tha t grea t leader s with significan t power s an d publi c suppor t wer e needed t o seiz e th e momen t t o aver t catastrophe s an d realiz e possibilities . Madison an d Hamilto n applie d Jay' s reasonin g t o th e conventio n an d th e Constitution. Madison indicate d tha t a national crisi s forced conventio n delegate s t o disregard their charg e to revis e the Articles o f Confederation an d obligate d the m to reinven t nationa l government . "I f the y ha d exceede d thei r powers, " h e wrote, "the y wer e no t onl y warrante d bu t require d b y th e circumstance s i n which the y were placed to exercise the liberty which the y assumed." Moreover , even "i f the y ha d violate d bot h thei r power s an d obligation s i n proposin g a Constitution," thei r decisio n wa s legitimat e becaus e i t wa s "calculate d t o ac -

136 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

complish the views and happiness of the people of America." Madison did not intend t o sugges t tha t al l leadership initiative s focuse d o n publi c happines s were justified. Rather , h e suggested tha t extralega l initiative s were warranted when grea t me n confronte d "th e absolute necessity " of defending "th e grea t principle o f self-preservation " b y makin g "grea t change s o f establishe d gov ernments." In 1776, America had been blessed with heroic leaders who instituted momentou s change s "b y som e informa l an d unauthorize d proposi tions," with "n o ill-time d scruples , n o zea l for adherin g t o ordinar y forms. " Again i n 1787 , Madison argued , America was blessed with heroi c me n wh o formulated innovativ e changes in national government. 15 Hamilton agree d tha t conventio n delegate s were oblige d t o exercis e prerogative "t o provide fo r th e exigencie s o f the Union" an d secur e "th e happiness of the country." His enduring concer n was to ensure that th e leaders of the new government would be sufficiently powerfu l t o provide for all exigencies because "too little power is as dangerous as too much, that it leads to anarchy, and from anarch y to despotism." Hamilton searched the Constitution s words (e.g., "necessary and proper") an d concepts (e.g. , "implied powers") t o support an interpretation tha t provided national leaders with enough author ity to addres s "necessitie s of society," which too k precedence ove r "rules an d maxims." Necessities included "existin g exigencies" and "probabl e exigencie s of th e ages. " Hamilton propose d tha t Americans empowe r thei r leader s "t o provide fo r futur e contingencie s a s they may happen" rathe r tha n "fetterin g the government wit h restriction s tha t canno t b e observed." And becaus e fu ture contingencies were "illimitable," leaders' capacity to address them had to be illimitable too. 16 Madison was more ambivalent about concentrated power but, like Hamilton, he did not want to fetter governmen t officials wit h "constitutional barriers to the impulse of self-preservation." H e believed that great public leaders ought t o hav e ample authorit y t o "maintai n a disciplined army " agains t po tential enemies and to resist men's "temporary errors and delusions" in orde r to blend "stability with liberty" and ensure domestic harmony and national security. Hamilton hoped that leaders' ample authority would grow through informal means . The Heroic Man coul d accrue considerable influence b y voicing words and performing deed s that captured "th e esteem and good-will" of citizens. A leader with a memorable track record positioned himsel f to "hazard with safety" unpopula r action s "in proportion t o the proofs he had given of his wisdom and integrity, and . .. th e respect and attachment of his fellowcitizens." He could accumulate surplus legitimacy and oppose public opinion without provoking mass disobedience. 17

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 13 7 Antifederalists warne d American s agains t so-calle d heroi c leaders . The y alerted the public to the "danger to be apprehended fro m vestin g discretionar y powers i n th e hand s o f man " an d encourage d citizen s "t o regulat e th e discre tion o f rulers. " However , a s Michae l Lienesc h suggests , antifederalist s als o "admitted th e powe r o f fortun e i n publi c affairs " an d recognize d th e advan tages o f prerogativ e fo r th e publi c good . Patric k Henr y wa s quit e willin g t o prescribe a strong dos e o f extralegal justice fo r on e Josiah Philips , a fugitive murdere r and an outlaw—a man who commanded an infamous ban ditti. . . . H e committe d th e mos t crue l an d shockin g barbarities . H e wa s a n enemy to the human name. Those who declare war against the human race may be struck out of existence as soon as they are apprehended. He was not executed according to those beautiful lega l ceremonies which are pointed out by the laws in criminal cases. The enormity of his crimes did not entitle him to it. I am truly a friend t o legal forms an d methods; but, Sir , the occasion warranted th e measure. A pirate, a n outlaw , o r a common enem y t o al l mankind ma y be put t o death. It is justified b y the laws of nature and nations. 18 For Henry, as for Hamilton , th e Heroic Man respecte d law but recognize d oc casions when i t was necessary to demonstrat e manl y "abilit y and faithfulness " by subordinatin g la w to th e mor e "weight y concern s o f the state." 19

Patriarchal Hegemony Several scholars identif y a n "erosio n o f patriarchal authority, " a n "antipatriar chal revolt, " an d a "revolutio n agains t patriarcha l authority " i n late-eigh teenth-century America . Father s los t authorit y ove r sons ; gentleme n wer e scorned b y commoners ; an d hereditar y kingshi p wa s replace d b y contractua l politics. "Almos t a t a stroke, " write s Gordo n Wood , "th e Revolutio n de stroyed al l th e earlie r tal k o f paterna l . . . government." Wood s judgmen t i s premature. Just a s the conteste d imag e o f the traditiona l patriarc h continue d into th e foundin g era , th e imag e o f the Heroi c Ma n a s a "common father " o f a "patriarchal family " persiste d i n Jefferson's justificatio n o f the Louisiana Pur chase as a paternal dut y and , mor e generally , i n th e founders ' belie f that grea t leaders establishe d hegemon y b y reconciling patriarcha l authorit y an d repub lican consent. 20 T h e foundin g er a was fille d wit h th e languag e o f political fatherhood . I n 1774, Ga d Hitchcoc k addresse d publi c official s a s "honore d fathers " an d "civic fathers." I n 1778 , Phillips Payso n referre d t o American leader s a s "civi l

138 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny fathers." I n 1780 , Samue l Coope r describe d th e framer s o f th e Article s o f Confederation a s "fathers o f their country " fille d wit h "parenta l tenderness. " In 1784 , Samue l McClintoc k honore d Ne w Hampshire' s framer s a s "father s of thei r country, " "father s an d guardian s o f thei r people, " an d "fathers , guides, an d guardians. " I n 1788 , Samue l Langdo n calle d publi c leader s "fa thers o f a larg e family. " I n 1791 , Israel Evan s tol d th e nation' s politica l "fa thers" tha t citizen s would "b e their politica l childre n a s long as they are goo d parents." I n 1792 , Timothy Ston e enjoine d official s t o b e "civi l fathers " wh o treated citizen s with th e "tende r car e of natural parents. " I n 1794 , Judith Sar gent Murra y asserte d tha t me n wante d "th e protectin g han d o f a guardia n power" an d gav e thei r guardia n "th e augus t title—Th e Fathe r o f hi s Coun try." I n 1795 , Peres Fobe s note d tha t " a ruler i s the fathe r o f his country " an d that slanderin g him wa s "parricide. " I n 1804 , Samuel Kenda l calle d o n Mass achusetts^ "venerabl e fathers " t o car e fo r th e people. 21 Patriarcha l expres sions o f politica l leadershi p wer e commonplac e fo r decade s afte r th e Revo lution. Federalists ofte n use d patriarcha l languag e t o reduc e men' s fear s tha t ratifi cation o f the U.S . Constitution woul d invit e despotic leadership . Earl y in th e debates, for example , James Wilson trumpete d th e prospect tha t the new president woul d b e no t a tyrant bu t a father figure t o "watc h ove r th e whole wit h paternal car e an d affection. " Madison , Hamilton , an d othe r federalist s fel t fortunate tha t th e nation' s greates t fathe r figure, Georg e Washington , wa s likely to becom e th e Republic' s first president . Ministers , writers, and citizen s considered Washingto n "th e fathe r o f th e country. " Zephania h Swif t Moor e called him "ou r political father," an d Alexander Addison addresse d him a s "the great fathe r o f his country. " Annis Boudino t Stockto n eve n describe d hi m i n regal terms . American s ratifie d a ne w Constitutio n "Whe n lo ! HIMSELF , th e CHIEF rever'd , / I n nativ e eleganc e appear'd , / An d al l thing s smil' d aroun d / Adorn'd with ever y pleasant art, / Enthron'd th e Sov'reign of each heart, / 1 sa w the HER O crown'd. " Noa h Webste r praise d Presiden t Washington's patriarcha l ability t o inspir e filial loyalty : The lon g an d eminen t service s o f ou r worth y Presiden t hav e filled all heart s with gratitude and respect; and b y means of this gratitude and respec t and th e confidence the y have inspired i n hi s talents an d integrity , h e has a greater in fluence i n Americ a tha n an y nobleman , perhap s tha n an y princ e i n Europe . This respect has hitherto restrained the violence of parties.... This is the effec t of his persona l influenc e an d no t a respect fo r th e laws or Constitution o f the United States . Americans rally round the man, rather tha n roun d th e executiv e authority of the union. 22

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 13 9

Six years later, Henry Holcombe eulogized Washington as a manly leader who "ruled his appetites and passions in scenes of the greatest trial and temptation " to serv e a s "th e father , friend , benefactor , an d bulwar k o f hi s country." 23 Washington epitomize d th e Heroi c Man— a nationa l fathe r figure whos e manly prowes s an d procreativ e abilitie s animate d citizens ' confidence , con sent, and compliance . Washington wa s unique . Man y founder s worrie d tha t othe r potentiall y great leader s ha d difficult y establishin g hegemony . After all , publi c censur e was "the unfailing lo t of an elevated station" and public envy was "the tax of eminence." The Heroic Man who earned high public standing was vulnerable to charges of aristocracy. His motives and values were subject t o public skepticism and trivializing opposition. His words and deeds were apt to be misinterpreted and used against him. Misunderstanding between heroic leaders and common citizen s wa s predictabl e becaus e grea t an d ordinar y me n wer e di vided b y vast differences . A towering intellec t suc h a s James Madison relie d on insights beyond the comprehension o f the average man who, for example, could not understand how "inconstancy" could be a virtue for Madison (wh o opposed and then proposed a Bill of Rights) but a vice for others. Great leaders were not boun d b y the foolish consistenc y that hobgobble d littl e minds . However, they were obliged to legitimize their authority by soliciting the consent of uncomprehending citizens. 24 A key function o f the grammar of manhood was to employ patriarchal language to transform threatenin g images of tyrannical leaders into friendly por traits o f familiar fathe r figures. Mos t Americans presume d tha t a father wa s devoted t o hi s family . H e wa s responsible , settled , an d trustworthy . Th e founders use d patriarcha l languag e t o conve y a parallel presumptio n tha t a "civic father" wa s devoted t o his political famil y an d was equally likely to b e responsible, settled , an d trustworthy . American writer s regularl y used famil y fatherhood a s a foundatio n fo r discussin g publi c leadership . Fo r example , Samuel Langdo n dre w lesson s fro m patriarcha l famil y lif e a s a basis fo r in structing New Hampshire's "muc h honored fathers " in public affairs: "With out constant care of your families, you will have bad servants, and your estates will be wasted. S o [you ] must pa y constant attentio n t o the great family . . . to b e a free an d happ y people." 25 Patriarcha l languag e signifie d tha t leader s were caring men who merited public obedience. Patriarchal languag e als o suggeste d tha t obedienc e t o heroi c leader s wa s consistent with manhood and citizenship. American men were accustomed to paternal authority. They honored ancestral fathers and expected sons to honor them. As such, political leaders who successfully presented themselves as civic

140 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

fathers could elicit considerable citizen deference. Although images of civic father figures pu t commo n citizen s i n th e symboli c rol e o f children , Rei d Mitchell points out that "a t least they do not make them sound like slaves or an inferior class or the dregs of society." Generally, American men still associated paternal rule with "benign authority." An adult son could honor his biological fathe r wit h obedienc e without sacrificin g hi s sense of independence ; similarly, a citizen could honor a political father by obeying him without feeling h e ha d sacrifice d manl y liberty . Meanwhile , patriarcha l languag e mad e dissent more daunting. It was one thing to oppose a tyrant but quite anothe r to tur n agains t a loving father. A s Mitchell put s it , "Th e parenta l metapho r made rebellion a primal sin." 26 Patriarchal languag e ha d th e additiona l advantag e o f stability . Whe n George III failed t o act as a Patriot King , colonists finally denounced hi m as a bad ruler and condemned kingship as a tyrannical institution. The terms of republican discourse changed suddenly, and only highly educated men coul d fully appreciat e th e dramati c reconceptualizatio n o f citizenshi p an d leader ship. B y contrast , th e term s o f patriarcha l discours e barel y changed . Mar y Beth Norto n argue s tha t the y survive d a s element s o f " a metaphorical lan guage" that identified th e norms of fatherhood a s legitimate criteria for lead ership. For example, "Philanthrop" explained that fears of corruption b y "the head of the family" did not eliminat e the institution o f marriage; by analogy, fears o f corruption b y leaders "selecte d t o preside at the helm o f [public ] af fairs" should not eliminate leadership authority. A few bad fathers did not destroy fatherhood ; a few ba d leader s shoul d no t en d assertiv e leadership. Extending thi s logic , John Smalle y criticize d corrup t patriarch s bu t supporte d strong patriarchal leaders. He denounced "libertine" males who acted in offic e like immature "children" by failing to hold the reins of government "with sufficient force" or "discretion." He advocated replacing them with powerful fa ther figures who would use sufficient forc e to secure public order. 27 Most founder s positivel y celebrate d th e conjunctur e o f fatherhoo d an d politics when they applauded ancestra l father s fo r pioneerin g th e continent , celebrated colonia l father s fo r spearheadin g protest s agains t Grea t Britain , commemorated revolutionar y father s fo r achievin g independence , an d hon ored civic fathers fo r procreating new states and a new nation. At times, their profuse prais e fo r thei r politica l father s wa s a prelude t o expressin g presen t fears tha t th e ag e of patriarchal heroe s was past and , henceforth , American s were doome d t o suffe r mediocr e leadership . "Wher e ar e ou r fathers? " crie d Stanley Griswold. "Where are our former me n of dignity... who in their day appeared lik e men?" Could America "brin g forwar d anothe r ban d o f sages"

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 14 1

when, alas, American males seemed to be "more disposed to act like children than men"? 28 Many founder s dwelle d o n th e "abundanc e o f rubbish " tha t constitute d contemporary manhood and political officialdom; bu t most agreed with Abigail Adams that there was still some "sterling metal in the political crucible." John Tucke r applaude d manl y individual s wh o wit h "grea t resolutio n an d firmness" distinguished themselves by their ability "to maintain a calmness of mind an d t o guide with a steady hand i n tempestuou s seasons. " Gad Hitch cock praised men who demonstrated th e ability "to lead and advise [th e public] in the more boisterous and alarming as well as in calm and temperate seasons." John Jay thought tha t th e Heroi c Ma n usuall y emerged fro m amon g those "highly distinguished b y their patriotism, virtue, and wisdom i n time s which tried the minds and hearts of men." And James Madison certainl y expected that , unde r th e Constitution , "th e pures t an d nobles t characters " would arise to confront th e nation s crises and restore peace, dignity, and prosperity to America.29 Adversity not only demanded grea t leaders and justifie d powerful ones ; it also called forth, tested , and identified th e Heroic Man who measured up to the highest standards of manhood. The standard s wer e diffus e bu t known . The y include d preeminenc e i n "ability and virtue" along with disciplined passion , family responsibility , an d social civility . Joh n Adam s emphasize d "exemplar y morals , grea t patience , calmness, coolness , an d attention, " whil e Elizu r Goodric h highlighte d "knowledge, wisdom, and prudence, courage and unshaken resolution, righteousness an d justic e tempere d wit h lenity , mercy , an d compassion , an d a steady firmness . . . and a sacred regard to the moral and religious interests of the community." Whatever the particular mix of virtues, the founders felt that great leaders made themselves known b y their powerful an d positive impac t on ordinar y men . Zephania h Swif t Moor e suggeste d tha t grea t leader s were men of "character and example" who had considerable "influence i n formin g the public mind." Zabdiel Adams asserted that great leaders exhibited "exemplary conduct" an d "contagious " manners, providing a "shining example" to improve mens conduct and support public order. 30 Ultimately, th e Heroi c Ma n distinguishe d himsel f fro m th e Famil y Ma n and th e Bette r Sor t b y transcendin g intergenerationa l tim e an d parochia l space. He honored the ancestral past but acted in the present to fulfill hi s calling to produce a memorable legacy for th e future. H e was exquisitely selfles s and supremel y public-spirited . H e als o claime d a n extraordinar y degre e o f manly liberty to follow conscience and maintain "integrity" by demonstrating "fortitude" an d "resolution " agains t "unprincipled " foe s wh o slandere d hi m

142 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

with "unmanl y bu t unavailin g calumny. " H e asserte d hi s righ t t o vindicat e "the dignity of men" by acting with a higher regard for th e public good tha n for hi s own family an d friends . H e could act against both maliciou s enemie s and misguided friends becaus e he sought neither leadership status nor publi c acclaim. Like Washington, h e preferred hom e life; like Franklin, he accepted the burdens of leadership solely to enlarge his capacity for "doin g good"; and like history's most memorable heroes, he risked fortune, fame, and immortality to procreate a better future fo r humankind. 31 Madison wrote, "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess the most wisdom to discern, and the most virtue to pursue, the common goo d of society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precaution s for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue t o hold thei r publi c trust." Man y founders wer e far mor e interested i n legitimizing and empowering manly leaders than in instituting precautionar y measures. They wer e convince d tha t th e Heroi c Ma n wa s bes t qualifie d t o pursue the public good while attracting the trust and consent of sober citizens. Most certainly, he should be applauded rather than rotated out of office. John Adams opposed mandator y rotatio n scheme s because "th e ablest me n i n th e nation ar e rooted out " an d peopl e were "deprive d . . . o f the service of their best men an d . . . obliged t o confer thei r suffrages o n th e next best until th e rotation brings them to the worst." Robert Livingston called mandatory rotation "a n absur d specie s o f ostracism—a mod e o f proscribing eminen t meri t and banishing from stations of trust those who have filled them with the greatest faithfulness."32 Th e Heroic Man was a huge asset. A republic treasured his presence rather than squandered his talents. Most founder s als o opposed mandator y instructio n scheme s tha t invite d the mediocr e masse s t o bin d talented , virtuou s leaders . Noa h Webste r de spised such schemes for fosterin g a "spirit o f exalting the people over the . . . magistrate" and miscastin g leader s i n th e rol e of "servants of the people" In struction scheme s tended "t o degrade all authority, t o bring the laws and th e officers o f government int o contempt , an d t o encourage discontent, faction , and insurrection." They "unmanned" leaders by denying them conscience, integrity, and choice. Washington asserted that a public official who ignored his own conviction s t o follo w publi c instruction s wa s mor e slav e tha n man : "What figure . . . must a delegate make who comes there with his hands tied and his judgment forestalled?" 33 Joel Barlow urged leaders to ignore flawed instructions: "Whe n th e delegat e receive s instructions whic h prov e to b e contrary to the opinion which he afterwards forms , he ought to presume that his constituents . . . ar e not well informed o n th e subject an d his duty is to vote

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 14 3

according to his conscience." Roger Sherman added that a leader was "bound by ever y principl e o f justice" t o elevat e conscienc e ove r instructions. 34 Th e founders subscribe d to an informal cree d which asserted that the Heroic Man had a paternal duty to reject erran t public opinion fo r the publics own good. Could a leader reject public opinion and still attract the consent of the governed? A grea t leade r could . Whe n Madiso n asserte d tha t a leader wa s no t "bound t o sacrific e hi s ow n opinion, " h e implie d tha t th e Heroi c Ma n wa s revered less for his brilliant reasoning and astute decision making than for his exceptional manhood . H e epitomize d th e consensua l nor m o f manl y inde pendence b y exhibitin g self-discipline , courage , fortitude , candor , an d in tegrity in th e mids t o f adversity. Mos t citizen s would hono r suc h nobl e displays of manhood with deference, even if they disputed resulting decisions. Jeremiah Wadswort h reporte d instance s whe n leader s "disregarde d thei r instructions and have been re-elected." Conversely, a leader who chained himself to public opinion was apt to be scorned as unmanly, even though his decisions reflected publi c opinion. Here, Wadsworth cited instances when "representatives followin g instruction s contrar y t o thei r privat e sentiment s . . . have eve r bee n despise d fo r it." 35 I n part , th e Heroi c Man s hegemon y wa s based o n hi s ability t o exemplif y ideal s o f manly independenc e an d insulat e himself against charges of effeminacy, slavishness , and childishness.

Manhood above Public Opinion and Law Most founders agree d that the Heroic Man neede d extraordinary freedom t o guide America to its destiny. He had to be able to forgo popularity and ignore legality, for example, when confronting th e crisis that called forth th e Constitutional Conventio n i n 1787 , addressin g th e problem s tha t prompte d th e Proclamation o f Neutrality in 1793, or investing in the opportunities afforde d by the Louisiana Purchas e i n 1803 . The Bachelo r was contemptuous o f peoples values and subordinate d t o lega l restraints ; the Famil y Man an d Bette r Sort hope d t o reconcil e popula r consen t an d politica l authority ; th e Heroi c Man stood above public opinion and law to procreate a new order for the ages. The founding generatio n distinguished popularit y from consent . No worthy ma n o r leade r solicite d a crude popularit y born e o f vanity, flattery, and show. Such popularity was foolish, fickle, and fleeting. It was identified wit h demagoguery and effeminacy. However , every worthy leader sought the consent o f the sobe r Famil y Man an d th e reputabl e Bette r Sor t alon g with th e grateful remembranc e o f futur e generations . Thi s endurin g consen t repre -

144 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

sented the stable trust and respect of solid citizens and the promise of a positive judgment b y posterity. Accordingly, th e Heroi c Ma n persevere d i n "th e plain path of duty" and remained "unmove d by noisy opposition, undaunte d by popular clamor, undismayed b y imminent danger. " He refused t o sacrific e duty to crude popularity, eve n though hi s refusal wa s likely to generate public envy , enmity , an d spite . John Adam s fel t tha t h e ha d t o fortif y himsel f "with a shield o f innocenc e an d honor " t o gover n agains t publi c acrimony . Thomas Jefferson though t himself "a constant but for every shaft o f calumny which malice and falsehood coul d form." 36 Predictably , th e Heroic Man suffered th e wrath o f lesser men. A leader s herois m partl y depende d o n ho w h e addresse d advers e publi c opinion. First , he should recogniz e the inevitable conflict betwee n manhoo d and popularity. Samue l Wales observed tha t a great leader often ha d t o support " a manly oppositio n . . . t o popula r prejudic e an d vulga r error. " Joh n Mitchell Mason adde d that a courageous leader who engaged "i n a manly attempt to avert national ruin" sometimes had to expose a "favorite error" of the public only to excite its "resentment." Alas, "none of [the worlds] benefactor s have escape d it s calumnie s an d persecutions. " Second , a grea t leade r ap proached th e conflic t betwee n manhoo d an d popularit y a s a challenge. Fo r Patrick Henry , th e challeng e wa s t o demonstrat e "manl y fortitude " an d "manly firmness" against "a n erring world." Other s defined i t in terms of exhibiting manl y "integrity " and "intrepidity " agains t "publi c execration." The Heroic Ma n bor e th e weigh t o f publi c antagonism ; a lesse r ma n collapse d under it and was reduced to "a crouching and fawning disposition [that ] takes the place of manliness."37 James Madiso n indicate d tha t a tensio n betwee n manl y leadershi p an d public opinio n wa s endemic t o republics . Sometimes, "publi c opinion mus t be obeyed b y the government" an d othe r time s it "ma y be influenced b y the government." Who decided whether public opinion or government guidanc e took precedence? Ideally, a great leader disseminated republica n principle s so that the citizenry itself knew when t o assert sovereignty and when t o defer t o leadership. Thus, George Washington sough t to secure "the enlightened con fidence of the people" by teaching citizen s "t o know and t o value their ow n rights; t o discer n an d provid e agains t invasion s o f them ; t o distinguis h be tween oppression and the necessary exercise of lawful authority ; between bur dens proceedin g fro m a disregar d t o thei r convenienc e an d thos e resultin g from th e inevitable exigencie s of society; to discriminat e th e spirit o f liberty from tha t o f licentiousness—cherishing th e first, avoiding the last; and unit ing a speedy but temperate vigilance against encroachments with an inviolable

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 14 5 respect t o th e laws." 38 However , mos t founder s di d no t coun t o n th e "en lightened confidenc e o f th e people " becaus e the y sa w me n a s mor e impas sioned tha n enlightened . The y relie d instea d o n leaders ' prerogativ e t o deter mine whe n t o hee d o r lea d publi c opinion , whe n t o obe y o r overste p th e boundaries o f law. The founder s too k thei r ide a o f politica l prerogativ e fro m Englis h fore bears. I n th e lat e medieval period , Englis h jurist s recognize d th e Crown' s pre rogative to govern in matters of domestic discord and foreig n relations . Henr y VIII an d Elizabet h expande d th e scop e o f royal prerogative, bu t Stuar t abuse s of it culminate d i n a revolution tha t establishe d restriction s o n it . Whigs pro moted libera l an d republica n theorie s tha t criticize d abuse s o f roya l preroga tive bu t als o retaine d benig n version s o f leadership prerogative . Locke' s liber alism affirme d a n executive' s prerogativ e t o ac t "withou t th e prescriptio n o f law, an d sometime s eve n agains t it " fo r th e goo d o f society. Lock e memorial ized Elizabet h fo r employin g a prope r prerogativ e t o unit e "he r interes t an d that o f her subjects. " Bolingbroke' s idea l republi c was rule d b y a Patriot Kin g who exercise d prerogativ e t o "rene w th e spiri t o f liberty" amon g citizens . H e too praise d Elizabet h fo r havin g exercised prerogative t o unit e "th e great bod y of the people." 39 Most founder s ha d a relatively benign view of prerogative. They applaude d or at least accepted roya l prerogative u p t o the moment o f revolution. I n 1774 , Gad Hitchcoc k distinguishe d th e abus e o f prerogative fro m it s prope r us e b y insisting, "Prerogativ e itsel f i s no t th e powe r t o d o anythin g i t please s bu t a power t o d o som e thing s fo r th e goo d o f th e community. " Th e sam e year , Thomas Jefferson calle d on Georg e II I t o assert prerogative t o reestablis h "fra ternal lov e an d harmon y throug h th e whol e empire." 40 After th e Revolution , some founder s raise d leadershi p prerogativ e t o th e statu s o f a sacred duty . Ed mund Randolp h explaine d a t the Constitutiona l Convention , "Whe n th e salvation o f th e republi c i s at stake , i t would b e treaso n t o ou r trus t no t t o pro pose what w e foun d necessary. " The framer s wer e les s prone t o debat e th e le gitimacy o f prerogativ e tha n t o discus s it s prope r application . W e ofte n remember Hamilton' s monarchica l ben t bu t w e als o shoul d recal l Madison' s support fo r a republican versio n o f "kingl y prerogative" : A negative in all cases whatsoever on th e legislative acts of the states, as heretofore exercise d b y kingly prerogative, appear s t o m e t o b e absolutel y necessar y and t o b e the leas t possible encroachmen t o n th e state jurisdictions. Withou t this defensiv e power , . . . the states will continu e t o invad e th e nationa l jurisdiction, to violate treaties and th e law of nations and to harass each other with rival an d spitefu l measure s dictate d b y mistake n view s o f interest . Anothe r

146 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny happy effect of this prerogative would be its control on the internal vicissitudes of state policy, and the aggressions of interested majorities on the rights of minorities and of individuals.41 Convention delegate s replace d Madison' s "kingl y prerogative " wit h th e Su premacy Clause , bu t the y supporte d a nationa l governmen t tha t provide d presidents, senators, justices, and military officers grea t discretionary latitude. Their collectiv e memory was filled with th e manly deeds of ancestral father s and revolutionary leaders inspired by "the spirit of the times" to claim extensive authority to make extraordinary history. 42 The founders di d have a problem with articulating and justifying politica l prerogative. The language of prerogative, like the language of aristocracy, was discredited b y its historical associatio n wit h Britis h tyrann y an d corruption . In 1787, Madison could speak positively but controversially about "kingly prerogative." A few years later, he found i t wiser to associate "prerogative" with "a monarchical model " an d the n condem n it . Nonetheless , man y American s continued to communicate the conceptual substance of leadership prerogative by employin g th e gramma r o f manhood . Fo r example , Merc y Oti s Warre n praised American diplomat s fo r maintainin g a n "independen t attitud e wit h manly dignity" when, in 1783, they ignored a lawful congressional directive "to be unde r th e council s o f France." 43 Most founder s agree d tha t grea t leader s needed t o exercise manly liberty and wield great discretionary power to govern a republic of disorderly men situated in a dangerous world.

Sustaining Hegemony The founder s invoke d crise s t o legitimiz e th e Heroi c Man' s prerogativ e t o rule. Di d a retur n t o "normalcy " signif y tha t grea t me n shoul d retir e fro m public life, rely on th e Better Sor t to make and administer law , and trust th e Family Man t o devote himself to provisioning his wife and children ? Or was normalcy a temporary interlude when great leaders prepared for the next crisis? The founder s aspire d t o a state o f republican normalc y when a government of laws would free most men to devote themselves to their families an d farms. But they saw the world as a dangerous place. Men and women were disorderly creatures and their infant republi c was surrounded b y hostile powers. Anticipating future crises , the founders generall y expected the Heroic Man to sustain hegemony and exercise prerogative for the foreseeable future . Sustaining hegemony, especially in peacetime, was a complex challenge. Ju-

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 14 7 dith Shkla r observe s tha t republic s "rel y o n mutua l trus t betwee n govern ments an d citizen s t o a n unusua l degree. " This interdependenc e generate s in tense suspicion s because , "Wher e ther e i s s o muc h relianc e o n trust , ther e must als o b e frequen t betrayals. " The resul t i s that republic s requir e " a highl y personalized politics " in which leader s constantly reassure citizens that trus t i n them i s warranted. Murra y Edelma n suggest s tha t leader s ofte n pl y th e ar t o f personalized politic s b y manipulatin g cultura l symbols , first t o arous e an d then t o assuag e people' s anxieties . I f ther e i s n o immediat e crisis , leader s ca n manufacture a symbolic on e t o legitimiz e thei r powe r an d foste r mas s quies cence. 44 Well awar e o f th e nee d t o sustai n publi c trus t ami d fear s o f betrayal , the founder s recognize d tha t leader s ha d t o practic e symboli c politic s t o en sure th e endurin g consen t o f the governed . Alexander Hamilto n graspe d th e fundamental s o f symboli c politics . H e often summone d th e specte r o f past, present , an d futur e crise s to arous e pub lic anxiet y an d the n justifie d powerfu l politica l leadershi p t o assuag e it . H e used th e prospec t o f "nationa l exigencies " t o justify presidents ' "grea t latitud e of discretion " i n choosin g appropriat e mean s t o achiev e th e publi c good . H e suggested tha t leader s ha d t o b e a s concerned wit h "appearance s a s realities. " It was crucial tha t "governmen t appear s to b e confident o f its own powers " because officials wh o appeare d confiden t inspire d "confidenc e i n others" and po sitioned themselve s t o mak e controversia l decision s wit h minima l dissent . Like Wadsworth, Hamilto n believe d tha t manl y leaders who acte d t o sav e th e people "fro m ver y fata l consequence s o f thei r ow n mistakes " coul d "procur e lasting monument s o f gratitude " b y exhibitin g "courag e an d magnanimit y enough t o serv e [th e people ] a t th e peri l o f thei r displeasure. " Georg e Wash ington als o understoo d symboli c politics . Durin g th e Revolution , fo r exam ple, h e trie d t o bolste r patriots ' confidenc e i n th e wa r effor t b y spreadin g ex aggerated public praise for his army's performance an d prospects, even thoug h he complaine d privatel y t o friends , relatives , an d Congres s tha t hi s troop s were unreliabl e an d ineffective. 45 Washington's symboli c politic s wa s assiste d b y Thomas Paine' s alchemica l transformation o f a n America n militar y defea t int o a symboli c victory . I n 1778, General How e conquere d Philadelphi a an d Washington's arm y was rid dled wit h dissension . Pain e explaine d t o America n reader s tha t How e "mis took a tra p fo r a conquest. " Hi s troop s wer e bogge d dow n i n Philadelphi a where the y wer e "sleepin g awa y th e choices t par t o f th e campaig n i n expen sive luxury. " How e wa s n o manl y leader . Hi s characte r wa s "unmilitar y an d passive"; his troo p movement s wer e motivate d b y fear an d fickleness; an d hi s military prospect s wer e dim . Indeed , Americ a neve r ha d "s o fai r a n opportu -

148 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny nity o f final succes s a s now." Pain e proclaimed , "Th e deat h woun d i s alread y given. The da y is ours i f we follow i t up. The enemy , by his situation, i s within our reach , an d b y his reduced strengt h i s within ou r power. " Victory was sim ply a matter o f Americans demonstratin g thei r confidenc e b y providing soli d support fo r th e Continenta l army. 46 Pain e understoo d tha t symboli c politic s could hav e tangibl e consequences . The founders ' symboli c politic s wa s saturate d wit h image s o f manhood , family, an d friendshi p conduciv e t o leadershi p prerogativ e an d citize n con sent. Reportin g o n hurrican e relie f efforts i n th e West Indies , a young Hamil ton laude d th e governo r fo r havin g "show n himsel f the Man" b y issuing stric t but human e regulation s t o reliev e public distress . The founder s ofte n empha sized aspects of manhood tha t combine d strengt h with carin g and justice wit h mercy abov e "weakness " an d "connivance. " Washingto n conveye d a sens e o f strength an d carin g whe n reportin g t o Congres s hi s decisio n t o pardo n Whiskey rebels : "Though I shall alway s think i t a sacred dut y t o exercis e wit h firmness an d energ y th e constitutiona l power s wit h whic h I a m vested , ye t i t appears t o m e n o les s consistent wit h th e publi c goo d tha n i t i s with m y per sonal feelings t o mingle in the operations o f government ever y degree of mod eration an d tenderness." 47 Lik e a fathe r wh o mixe d disciplin e an d love , th e Heroic Man infuse d authorit y with tendernes s t o personalize politics and pro mote citize n confidenc e i n him . Family symbolism figured prominentl y i n leaders' efforts t o solicit and sus tain consent. Defendin g th e Alien an d Seditio n Acts, John Thayer argue d tha t President Adams' s motive s wer e honorabl e b y stating : "Thi s grea t ma n ca n have nothin g i n vie w bu t th e happines s an d prosperit y o f hi s fello w citizens , with whos e fortune s hi s ow n an d thos e o f his famil y ar e evidentl y an d insep arably connected. " A draf t o f Washington's first Inaugura l Addres s pu t a dif ferent spi n o n th e leade r a s Famil y Man . Washingto n hope d t o convinc e Americans tha t hi s presidenc y pose d n o threa t t o libert y b y pointing ou t tha t he wa s a stepfathe r (a s oppose d t o a biologica l father ) wit h n o dynasti c prospects: "Divin e providenc e hat h no t see n fit tha t m y bloo d shoul d b e transmitted o r m y nam e perpetuate d b y the endearin g thoug h sometime s se ducing channel o f immediate offspring. I have no child for whom I could wis h to mak e a provision—n o famil y t o buil d i n greatnes s upo n m y country' s ruins." Tenc h Cox e sa w republica n leadershi p a s a variatio n o n stepfather hood: "A s their son s ar e not t o succee d them , the y will not b e induced t o ai m at a perpetuity o f their power s a t th e expens e o f the libertie s o f the people." 48 The Heroi c Ma n wa s bot h a fathe r figure wh o coul d b e truste d t o see k th e good o f his public family an d a stepfather figure wh o coul d b e trusted becaus e

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 14 9

he wa s no t tempte d t o transfor m publi c powe r int o a dynasti c legacy . Hi s blood was invested in the Republic. The founder s use d image s of family an d fraterna l trus t t o outlin e th e appropriate relationshi p betwee n grea t leader s an d commo n citizens . Noa h Webster ridicule d "th e man who, as soon a s he has married a woman o f unsuspected chastity, locks her up in a dungeon," just as he condemned the practice o f voter s t o elec t politica l leader s onl y immediatel y t o "ar m ourselve s against them a s against tyrants and robbers. " Nathanael Emmon s argue d fo r a presumption o f mutual confidenc e amon g all members of Americas political famil y a s a basis fo r criticizin g individual s wh o "trampl e o n huma n au thority" with thei r "unrul y spirit" or "restless , discontented, seditiou s spirit, " foolishly thinking that they played "a noble, manly, patriotic part" when they actually behave d lik e littl e boy s b y "weakenin g th e hand s o f ruler s an d de stroying the energy of government." Emmons's message was that "nothing but absolute necessit y can justify . . . breaking th e band s o f society." Ultimately , John Adam s insisted , th e Heroi c Ma n deserve d t o b e respecte d b y "ever y manly mind." H e was resisted only by children. 49 The Heroi c Man fortifie d publi c trust b y appearing i n publi c as the citi zen's friend . Israe l Evan s observe d tha t "exalte d character s i n authorit y fee l themselves connected to the whole community by a brotherly, benevolent attachment." Publi c expression s o f fraterna l feelin g reassure d me n tha t thei r "lives an d estates " were "secure. " Grea t leader s neithe r flaunted hig h statu s nor calle d attentio n t o th e socia l distanc e tha t separate d the m fro m com moners. Instead, the y self-consciously identifie d wit h ordinar y men an d befriended the m "t o establis h estee m an d confidenc e betwee n th e peopl e an d their rulers. " Especially important, grea t leaders conducted themselve s wit h what Pere s Fobes described a s "an affable deportment , a complacency o f behavior, and such conciliating manners as cannot fail to secure the most commanding influenc e ove r th e people." 50 Leader s fortifie d hegemon y wit h ci vility. The debate over the Constitution raise d the issue of whether the sheer size of the ne w nationa l governmen t woul d preclud e leader s fro m cultivatin g a sense o f fello w feelin g wit h mos t citizens . Antifederalist s argue d tha t th e great geographica l exten t o f th e propose d polit y an d th e hug e number s o f men composing each electoral district worked against the likelihood that national leaders would b e widely recognized, known , respected , o r befriende d by citizens . "Brutus " complained , "Th e peopl e . . . will hav e very littl e acquaintance with thos e who may be chosen t o represen t them ; a greater par t of them will probably no t kno w the characters o f their ow n members muc h

150 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

less that o f a majority o f those who will compose the federal assembly ; the y will consist of men whose names they have never heard and of whose talents and regard for th e public good they are total strangers to; and they will have no person s s o immediately o f their choic e so near them , o f their neighbor s and o f their ow n rank in life that the y can feel themselve s secure in trustin g their interest s i n thei r hands. " If American me n cam e t o view their leader s "as a body distinct from them, " the result would be a deficit i n public confi dence, which guaranteed tha t factionalis m an d fratricide woul d prevail over fraternalism.51 Madison agree d tha t nationa l leader s needed t o cultivat e "persona l influ ence amon g th e people " t o gai n men' s confidence . H e als o recognize d tha t most member s o f the executive and judicial branche s would b e unknown t o citizens. He argued, however, that member s of Congress would b e in a position t o build network s o f public friendship. They would b e more numerou s and accessible than othe r federal officials ; the y would "dwel l among the people at large" and hav e "connections o f blood, o f friendship, an d o f acquain tance" that extende d t o "th e most influentia l par t o f society." The mos t in fluential part of society included local notables who would have "ties of personal acquaintanc e an d friendshi p an d o f family" t o thei r constituents . Pu t differently, th e Heroic Man would b e personally acquainted with th e Bette r Sort, wh o woul d intermingl e wit h th e Famil y Man . A grea t leade r coul d strengthen serial bonds with common men by expressing "a manly confidence in their country" and by lauding the "manly spirit which actuates the people of America."52 A man, father, and friend t o the people honored citizens' manhood. The founder s procreate d fraterna l twins : (1 ) a n institutiona l republi c o f men an d laws ; and (2 ) a symbolic politics tha t legitimize d democrati c defer ence to leadership prerogative. During extraordinary times, most founders fel t that th e Republic's health an d surviva l ultimatel y depended o n th e ability of a few men to rule the democratic masses, build public support amon g them , ensure orde r i n th e rank s o f men , an d mee t th e historica l challenge s o f th e modern era. What best distinguished a great leader was his ability to reconcile leadership prerogative and republican sovereignty. The Heroic Man appeare d in publi c a s a confident an d carin g man , a fatherly an d friendl y man , wh o calmed fear s o f betraya l an d earne d sufficien t citize n trus t t o gover n wit h widespread compliance and quiescence. Although he sometimes governed regardless of public opinion an d law, he had little reason "to recur to force" because he could count o n men's "esteem and good will" to sustain the consent of the governed. 53

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 15 1

A Government of Men The politic s of war and peac e was the preeminent domai n fo r manhoo d an d leadership in the service of posterity. The founders tol d the story of Americas struggle for liberty as a battle of virtuous fathers and sons against "cruel and unmanly" enemie s oppose d t o natura l right s an d nationa l independence . Th e moral of their story was that the peaceful exercis e of liberty required citizens to show manly restraint at home and a "dignified, manly , independent spirit " in their dealings abroad. 54 Becaus e the founders ha d limited fait h i n most men s ability to exercise self-restraint an d practice civility, they relied on exceptiona l leaders to identify thei r own manhood with the nations fortunes an d exercise authority to secure the Republic s survival, safety, and reputation in the world. The founders enliste d the grammar of manhood to legitimize controversial foreign polic y initiatives . Fo r example , Presiden t Washingto n anticipate d public outcry if he signed a treaty with Grea t Britai n tha t contradicte d prio r agreements with France . He told Secretar y Hamilton tha t he wanted a treaty that could be "assimilated with a firm, manly, and dignified conduct. " When the resultin g Jay Treaty precipitated predictabl e opposition , Washington de fended hi s action s a s a product o f "manl y an d neutra l conduc t whic h . . . would so well become us as an independent nation. " He also pointed ou t th e unmanly "misconduct of some of our own intemperate people" who subordinated the public good to French interests. 55 Though the y often dispute d for eign policy , mos t founder s agree d tha t nationa l leader s shoul d exercis e a manly prerogativ e t o establish , defend , an d exten d America s independenc e and respectability in the world. International respectability was important. During the Revolution, Hamilton argued that unification wa s desperately needed to enhance Americas reputation abroad: "There is something noble and magnificent i n the perspective of a great federal republic, closely linked in the pursuit of a common interest , tranquil and prosperous at home, respectable abroad." He was mortified tha t America was "a number of petty states with the appearance only of union, jarring, jealous, and perverse, without any determined direction, fluctuating and unhappy a t home, weak and insignifican t b y their dissension s i n th e eyes of other nations. " After th e Revolution , Pain e calle d o n Americans t o buil d " a fair nationa l reputation " t o comman d globa l "reverence. " Jefferson an d Ja y wanted Americans to gain "respect in Europe" to dispose European powers "to cultivate ou r friendshi p [rather ] tha n provok e ou r resentment." 56 America s reputation abroa d would determin e it s fit, fame, an d futur e i n th e fraternit y of Western nations .

152 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny How di d a ne w natio n achiev e internationa l respectability ? Th e founder s tried t o creat e a notabl e nationa l identit y b y disseminatin g th e stor y o f thei r manly struggl e fo r libert y an d independence . The y relate d th e adventure s o f freedom-loving fathers , patrioti c brothers , an d valian t son s o f liberty t o foste r fraternal feeling s a t hom e an d produc e a n exalte d bu t fearsom e reputatio n abroad. Their messag e was twofold . First , Americans' devotio n t o libert y wa s so stron g tha t the y ha d defeate d th e mos t powerfu l arm y an d nav y i n th e world. Second , thei r lov e of liberty was so enduring tha t the y would mobiliz e anew t o defea t an y powe r tha t threatene d thei r security . Hamilto n like d th e message but limite d it s longevity. American men' s memorable deed s and wor thy reputatio n wer e likely to b e compromised b y their curren t excesses . W h a t was happenin g t o Frenc h revolutionarie s coul d happe n t o American citizens : A struggle for liberty is in itself respectable and glorious. When conducte d with magnanimity, justice , an d humanit y i t ough t t o comman d th e admiratio n o f every friend t o human nature. But if sullied by crimes and extravagances, it loses its respectability. Though succes s may rescu e it fro m infamy , i t canno t i n th e opinion of the sober part of mankind attach to it much positive merit or praise. But in event of want of success, a general execration must attend to it. It appears thus far bu t to o probabl e tha t th e pending revolutio n o f France has sustaine d some serious blemishes. There is too much ground to anticipate that a sentence uncommonly severe will be passed upon i t if it fails. 57 Even wit h constitutiona l unification , man y founder s feare d tha t men' s exces sive passions and democratic disorders would weaken th e United States ' global standing. A governmen t le d b y grea t me n wa s neede d t o protec t America n libert y b y ensuring stabilit y a t hom e an d unifie d purpos e abroad . Jame s Madiso n ex plained, "An individual who is observed to be inconsistent with his plans, or perhaps carry on his affairs withou t an y plan at all, is marked at once by all pruden t people a s a speedy victim o f his ow n unsteadines s an d folly . Hi s mor e friendl y neighbors ma y pit y him, bu t al l will declin e t o connec t thei r fortune s wit h his ; and not a few will seize the opportunity of making their fortunes ou t of his. On e nation i s to another what one individual i s to another." National leader s neede d to establis h and maintai n domesti c order as well as develop and pursu e nationa l unity of purpose for America to build consistent, cooperativ e relationships wit h friendly nation s an d fen d of f victimizatio n b y hostil e ones . Hamilto n empha sized that leaders needed considerable political, economic, and militar y clout t o support national unity of purpose when i t was necessary, for example, to uphol d neutrality o r repe l aggressio n t o avoi d "nationa l humiliation." 58

The Heroic Man and National Destiny I 15 3 Regardless of their expressed fears of powerful leaders , most founders relie d on th e president t o serv e as the repositor y o f national unit y o f purpose i n for eign policy . Th e U.S . Constitutio n impose d fe w check s o n a president' s au thority t o formulat e foreig n policy , administe r it , an d comman d th e militar y to enforc e it . Equall y important , Washington' s precedent-settin g presidenc y demonstrated tha t Americans would rall y around a great leader while his neu trality proclamatio n confirme d tha t citizen s woul d tolerat e presidentia l pre rogative in foreig n policy . When Presiden t Adams conjure d u p what Madiso n considered a fals e crisi s tha t threatene d t o undermin e men s libert y a t hom e and engag e the m i n a foolish wa r abroad , Madiso n observe d tha t a president' s exercise o f prerogativ e i n foreig n polic y wa s bot h inevitabl e an d dangerous . That wa s wh y i t wa s crucia l tha t a "cool , considerate , an d cautious " individ ual lik e Washingto n rathe r tha n a "headlong " perso n lik e Adam s ma n th e helm o f state. I n 1800 , Madison's preferenc e wa s Thomas Jefferson , wh o reaf firmed i n word an d dee d th e nee d fo r exceptiona l leader s t o ma p foreig n pol icy and stee r th e natio n throug h turbulen t internationa l waters. 59 Ultimately, mos t founder s depende d o n th e Heroi c Ma n t o frame , govern , and promot e a reputabl e republic . The y understoo d tha t governanc e wa s a s much a matter o f the "ar t of definition" a s their ne w science of politics. Madi son wa s attentiv e t o th e "plianc y o f language. " H e feare d demagogue s wh o manipulated languag e t o mislea d men . Thus , h e criticize d Seditio n Ac t sup porters fo r "sophistry " whe n makin g a fals e distinctio n "betwee n th e libert y and licentiousnes s o f the press " or when attemptin g th e "seductio n o f expedi ency" t o ro b me n o f liberty. However , Madiso n als o appreciate d th e utilit y o f language fo r legitimizin g leadershi p an d promotin g th e publi c good , an d proved quit e adep t a t th e ar t o f definition . S o to o di d th e "Republican, " fo r example, wh o reinvente d th e meanin g o f "unanimou s consent " t o announc e that th e whol e Constitutiona l Conventio n supporte d ratification . Yes , thre e delegates dissented , bu t the y di d no t coun t becaus e the y acte d "fro m partia l considerations tha t ca n hav e n o weigh t wit h a free an d enlightene d people. " The founder s relie d o n th e authorit y o f languag e t o shap e publi c discourse , create a collectiv e identity , promot e domesti c orde r an d internationa l rep utability, an d fix thei r ow n plac e i n history . Indeed , the y define d themselve s as living exemplar s o f th e Heroi c Ma n wh o procreate d a republic o f men. 60 Abigail Adam s demonstrate d remarkabl e insigh t whe n sh e observe d t o John tha t "th e art o f government" wa s " a prerogative t o which you r se x lay a n almost exclusiv e claim. " Th e founder s practice d th e ar t o f manl y politics . They used the grammar o f manhood t o highlight th e procreativity of men an d to di m th e politica l potenc y o f women . The y als o applie d th e gramma r o f

154 I The Heroic Man and National Destiny

manhood t o justify th e rul e o f a few grea t me n ove r commo n me n t o neu tralize democratic passions , foster orde r i n th e rank s of men, rais e Americas standing in the world, an d convey to posterity a legacy in which the y would be remembere d a s foundin g fathers—a s fertil e me n wh o gav e birth , i n William Pitt's words, to "a glorious asylum of liberty, of manliness."61

7 The Founders' Gendered Legac y

The American founder s employe d a grammar o f manhood tha t distinguished fou r rank s o f men . Th e lowes t ran k wa s symbolize d b y th e Bachelor, the passionate man who was isolated i n time and space, distruste d by other men, and deemed a danger to social order and political stability. He was ridiculed , stigmatized , sanctioned , an d sometime s imprisoned . Th e main rank was represented by the Family Man who disciplined passion to fit into the role of responsible husband, father , an d neighbor. He merited suffi cient respect to be entrusted with citizenship. A more select rank was constituted b y th e Bette r Sor t o f ma n wh o sufficientl y mastere d th e norm s o f manly integrity and civility to earn personal dignity, social respect, and public influence. He demonstrated virtue and wisdom enough to represent othe r men an d mak e la w fo r them . Th e highes t ran k wa s reserve d fo r th e rar e Heroic Man who cultivated civic virtue and procreated a new nation for posterity. H e stoo d abov e la w an d publi c opinio n t o addres s th e exigencie s o f fortune bu t secured hegemony to ensure the consent and quiescence of most men. Fearful o f democrati c disorde r i n th e rank s o f men , th e founder s em ployed th e grammar o f manhood t o encourag e me n t o refor m themselves , school their sons to exercise liberty with restraint, and restore and reinforc e order i n publi c life . They invoke d wha t James Madiso n calle d "th e manl y spirit" t o lift u p me n i n eac h ran k an d encourag e the m t o defe r t o higher ranking leaders . Som e founder s considere d themselve s heroe s o f the high est caliber , extraordinaril y procreativ e me n destine d t o produc e a bette r world fo r humankind . Thei r attitud e wa s bot h arrogan t an d insightful . Their arroganc e was partly based on patriarchal privilege ; they could thin k and ac t almost exclusivel y in term s o f men's passions, interests, virtues, aspirations, hierarchies , an d authorit y becaus e the y inherite d an d perpetu ated women' s exclusion fro m publi c life . Thei r insightfulnes s wa s mani fested i n thei r impact ; thei r republi c o f men prove d t o b e durable an d in fluential.

i55

156 I The Founders'Gendered Legacy

Durable Manhood For tw o hundred years , Americans hav e struggled with varying degrees of success t o exten d th e founders ' revolutionar y promis e o f libert y an d equality . Major successe s include the demise of slavery and th e achievement o f women's voting rights . However , th e relationshi p betwee n manhoo d an d politic s ha s hardly changed . America n male s o f al l races , religions , classes , an d region s continue t o buil d hierarchie s tha t stigmatiz e disorderl y men , provid e varyin g degrees o f respec t an d influenc e t o me n i n th e middle , an d affor d grea t au thority t o th e fe w o n top . Generatio n afte r generatio n o f American boy s ha s adapted t o thes e patriarcha l hierarchies , an d generatio n afte r generatio n o f American me n ha s participate d i n them . In hi s stud y o f America n nineteenth-centur y "bo y culture, " E . Anthon y Rotundo observe s tha t youn g male s wh o interacte d beyon d th e immediat e oversight o f thei r parent s regularl y establishe d a "serie s o f informa l rankings " that challenge d eac h youngste r t o ear n hi s plac e i n th e adolescen t "peckin g order." T he mos t successfu l boy s displayed "independence " throug h will , dar ing, prerogative , an d force ; the y learne d "t o maste r th e emotion s tha t woul d otherwise mak e the m vulnerable" ; an d the y employe d "ridicule , ostracism , [and] hazing " t o establis h an d enforc e thei r hegemon y ove r others. Most boy s earned a modest plac e by exhibiting exuberanc e an d spontaneity , an d als o disdain fo r adul t authority . Eventually , thes e middlin g boy s ha d t o mak e "th e leap fro m boyhoo d t o manhood " b y givin g u p "heedles s pla y fo r sobe r re sponsibility." Boy s lackin g prope r size , appearance , pluck , o r athleti c skill s sometimes ha d t o fight fo r thei r manhood . Thos e wh o los t confrontation s o r ran awa y fro m the m wer e likel y t o b e debase d a s "mama s boys, " wh o ha d failed t o separate from female s o r overcome effeminacy. The y suffered a n arra y of youthful cruelties. 1 Today's bo y cultur e reproduce s a remarkabl y simila r pattern . Barri e Thome's stud y o f moder n gende r pla y suggest s tha t boys ' relationship s "ten d to b e overtl y hierarchical. " Boy s "negotiate " an d "mar k rank " b y demonstrat ing admire d qualitie s an d b y issuin g "insults , direc t commands , challenges , and threats " to reinforc e rankings . High-statu s boy s command widesprea d re spect an d deference ; middle-statu s boy s jockey t o maintai n o r rais e thei r po sition; an d low-statu s boy s suffer considerabl e i f no t constan t humiliation . Thorne capture s th e extreme s i n thi s contrast : "John , wh o wa s th e talles t bo y in the class and one of the best athletes in the school, deftly handle d challenge s to hi s authority. Dennis , who was not very good a t sports or a t academics, was at th e othe r en d o f th e peckin g order . Joh n . . . calle d Denni s 'Dumbo ' an d

The Founders Gendered Legacy 1 15 7 insulted hi m i n other ways; in a kind o f ritual submission, Denni s mor e or less accepted th e insults. " Weake r boy s ar e als o humiliate d b y epithet s suc h a s "girls," "sissies, " and "fags. " High-statu s boys ' hegemon y i s based o n low-sta tus boys ' consen t t o subordination. 2 Boys become me n wh o participat e i n an d perpetuat e adul t peckin g orders . Joseph Plec k observes that "me n creat e hierarchies an d ranking s amon g them selves according to criteri a of masculinity" an d the n "compet e with eac h othe r . . . fo r th e differentia l payoff s tha t patriarch y allow s men. " R . W . Connel l specifies thre e general ranking s amon g men : "hegemoni c masculinity , conser vative masculinitie s (complici t i n th e collectiv e projec t bu t no t it s shoc k troops), an d subordinate d masculinities." 3 Connell' s hegemoni c masculinit y is consisten t wit h wha t I hav e represente d a s th e founders ' Heroi c Man ; hi s conservative masculinitie s encompas s th e Bette r Sor t and th e Family Man; hi s subordinated masculinitie s includ e th e margina l me n an d minoritie s epito mized b y th e Bachelor . I n all , th e moder n rhetori c o f liberty , equality , an d democracy has not inhibite d American me n fro m complyin g with a seemingly iron la w o f mal e oligarchy : a few me n rule , th e majorit y o f me n consen t an d obey, an d margina l me n mostl y accep t subordination . W h y d o America n me n perpetuat e thes e hierarchies ? On e facto r i s tha t high-status males believe they must govern, in order to prevent disorderl y me n from destroyin g life , liberty , an d happiness . The y applau d powerfu l leader s who exercis e prerogativ e t o resolv e nationa l crise s an d realiz e historica l op portunities. The y shar e patriarcha l sensibilitie s tha t cal l fo r manl y leader s t o protect wome n fro m libertine s an d othe r dangerou s men . Willia m Good e suggests tha t men' s emotiona l tie s t o thei r mothers , sisters , wives , an d girl friends provid e the m a n incentiv e t o protec t wome n fro m th e disorderl y me n who threate n t o har m them . Thes e carin g me n ar e "sur e o f thei r ow n good heartedness an d wisdom " bu t fearfu l o f other men' s "exploitativ e efforts. " Ac cordingly, the y believ e "tha t the y ar e t o b e truste d an d s o shoul d hav e grea t power," bu t "othe r me n canno t b e trusted " an d s o shoul d b e restrained. 4 T o the exten t tha t high-statu s me n continu e t o concu r wit h th e founders ' belie f that mos t male s ar e disorderl y creatures , the y locat e themselve s amon g th e Better Sor t wh o ar e sufficientl y trustworth y t o gover n th e dangerou s masse s as well a s to rul e womankind . A complementar y facto r i s tha t low-statu s male s hav e a stron g incentiv e to acquiesce , accommodate , an d assen t t o th e mal e hierarchie s tha t subordi nate them . Mar k Gerzo n assert s tha t th e averag e America n mal e i s fearfu l that othe r me n wil l perceiv e hi m an d trea t hi m "a s a bo y an d no t a man. " Powerful me n hav e use d thi s understandin g t o manipulat e others . Fo r exam -

158 I The Founders Gendered Legacy

pie, dominan t whit e male s reinforce d thei r historica l dominatio n o f blac k and Indian male s by labeling them "children " and treating them like dependents. Modern leaders still stigmatize enemies by tagging them with male immaturity. President Lyndon Johnson condemned "th e talkers and writers and the intellectual s wh o sa t aroun d thinkin g an d criticizin g an d doubting " a s "boys"; bu t h e honore d "activists , doers , who conquere d busines s empires , who acted instead of talked" as "men." Why should an y male care if powerful me n labe l him a boy? David Leverenz explains that American male s harbor "fear s o f being humiliated . . . b y other men. " And becaus e humiliatio n often i s a forerunner t o sever e sanctions, th e safes t strateg y fo r a low-status male seeking to avoid shame and punishment i s to conform t o ordinary standards o f manhoo d an d achiev e a t leas t modes t respectabilit y i n th e mal e pecking order. 5 The American consensus on men s main route to modest respectability has not changed in two hundred years. It still involves independence, family commitment, and governing subordinates. Stable norms of manhood declare that males ought to practice intellectual and emotional autonomy as well as secure sufficient wealt h o r incom e t o settl e down, marry , sir e children, rul e femal e and male dependents, and perpetuate family dynasties. This declaration is periodically reaffirmed b y critics who first complai n tha t bachelorhoo d i s causing family declin e an d socia l breakdown an d the n cal l on me n t o recommi t themselves t o famil y responsibilit y an d civi c order . Late-seventeenth - an d early-eighteenth-century Englis h writer s responde d t o men s antimaritalis m by invigoratin g demand s tha t me n marr y an d fulfil l famil y duties . Today , American analyst s lin k men' s "fligh t fro m commitment " t o a n antimarita l ethic that legitimizes freedom withou t family responsibility. Both liberals and conservatives criticiz e American me n fo r failin g "t o invest time , money , an d energy in famil y life " an d advocat e a revival o f "famil y values " to encourag e men to rebuild the family nest. 6 From the founders' time to our time, American leaders have viewed mature manhood as a remedy for the male lust, licentiousness, selfishness, avarice, impulsiveness, aggression, and violence that foster disorde r in the ranks of men. Manly merit still centers on individuals' ability to discipline their passions, elevate family interest s abov e individual pleasures , and achiev e social fit i f not seek social fame in the service of the public good and posterity. Although th e founders' rhetori c o f libert y an d equalit y fortifie d a Lockea n individualis m that gave rise to an ethic of self-made manhood , thei r devotion to consensual norms of manhood persists into the present to counteract bot h male individualism and women's claims to liberty and equality.

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 15 9

Manhood against Individualism The founders ' gramma r o f manhood favore d manl y merit , self-discipline , re sponsibility, civility , an d procreativit y fo r th e publi c good . Di d i t als o legit imize th e action s o f men who harnesse d manl y characteristic s t o individua l self-interest? T h e backwoodsman , fo r example , coul d exhibi t grea t self-con trol, famil y responsibility , an d politica l artistr y whe n h e provoke d borde r wars, murdere d indigenou s peoples , speculate d i n frontie r land , an d per suaded th e U.S. government an d militar y t o suppor t hi s violence an d profi teering. Did the classical meaning o f manhood a s self-sacrifice an d civic virtue give wa y to masculin e individualism , rugge d individualism , possessiv e indi vidualism, o r ideal s o f self-made manhoo d i n earl y America? Joyc e Appleby , John Diggins , an d Joan Hof f thin k so . They argu e tha t th e founders strippe d "virtue" o f its classical civi c meanin g an d reduce d mal e virtu e t o th e pursui t of self-interest. 7 Unquestionably, th e founders' rhetori c o f liberty an d equality helpe d pro mote individualis m amon g whit e males . Rotund o emphasize s tha t th e founders recognize d "th e growing claim s o f th e self " bu t "onl y o f th e male self." This recognitio n helpe d catalyz e th e breakup o f corporate familie s an d traditional communities , o n th e on e hand , an d legitimiz e individua l rights , entrepreneurship, contractua l relations , an d interest-base d politics , o n th e other. Individualis m was also manifested i n American fraterna l life . Men ofte n bonded t o optimiz e individua l an d aggregat e utilities . The y joine d th e self help group s popularize d b y Franklin an d th e factions neutralize d b y Madis onian institution s t o enhance thei r socia l standing, enric h thei r economi c opportunities, an d gai n politica l leverage . Wilso n Care y McWilliam s suggest s that th e individualism a t the core of American fraternitie s i s what mad e the m defective. Me n committed themselve s t o fraternitie s onl y insofa r a s they rec ognized a congruence o f interests; the y faile d t o wed private desire s t o publi c ideals i n way s tha t connecte d self-wort h t o endurin g civi c values . Sanfor d Lakoff add s tha t American me n participated i n republica n politic s onl y inso far as they connected self-interes t t o aggregate "publi c interest." They faile d t o join self-sacrific e t o civic loyalty i n support o f the classica l "commo n good." 8 The founder s grante d whit e males ' individualis m it s due. They dwelle d o n men's passions , avarice , an d factionalism. Bernar d Baily n state s tha t "federal ists and antifederalists bot h agree d tha t ma n in his deepest natur e wa s selfis h and corrupt ; tha t blin d ambitio n mos t ofte n overcome s eve n th e most clear eyed rationality ; an d that th e lust for power was so overwhelming tha t n o one should eve r b e entruste d wit h unqualifie d authority." 9 Simultaneously , thei r

160 I The Founders'Gendered Legacy understanding o f manhoo d an d fraternit y wen t beyon d selfishness . Th e founders dispute d th e Bachelor' s lustful , avariciou s manhoo d an d sough t t o restrain hi s passion s an d interests . The y worrie d abou t th e Famil y Man' s parochialism, encourage d hi s devotio n t o neighbors , an d pleade d fo r hi s loy alty t o leader s committe d t o th e publi c good . Libera l individualis m bega n t o flourish i n th e foundin g era , bu t th e gramma r o f manhoo d counteracte d i t with a n ethi c of self-restraint an d subordinatio n i n th e servic e of order, stabil ity, an d posterity . Throughout American history , norms o f manhood encourage d male s to restrain individualis m an d realiz e thei r socia l natur e b y committin g themselve s to family, friends , community , an d nation . The founder s di d no t portra y mal e creatures solel y i n egomaniaca l terms . They agree d tha t me n wh o wer e indi viduated an d isolate d suffere d grea t unhappiness . They als o agreed tha t men' s selfish passion s were accompanie d b y a moral sensibilit y an d natura l sociabil ity. The founder s admire d gregariou s me n wh o establishe d informa l network s and founde d forma l organization s tha t fostere d mutua l carin g an d commu nity. Fo r example, earl y American Freemasonr y honore d mobilit y i n th e mar ketplace bu t "als o attempted t o chec k th e growt h o f an unrestricte d pursui t o f self-interest throug h it s concep t o f itself as a brotherhood, a n institutio n tha t promoted loyalt y and benevolence. " Fraterna l order s relie d on secre t rituals t o cultivate mal e bondin g an d benevolence . Th e ritual s require d initiate s an d members t o demonstrat e manl y meri t b y makin g symboli c an d tangibl e sac rifices fo r fraternit y an d th e flag. "Rathe r tha n reinforcin g th e form s an d ide ologies o f capitalis t socia l organization, " Mar k Carne s suggests , "th e ritual s often subverte d them." 1 0 The endurin g associatio n o f American manhoo d an d fraternit y wit h self sacrifice an d civi c virtu e i s especiall y eviden t i n America n militar y thought . The founder s believe d tha t me n wer e obligate d b y their birthrigh t t o suppor t and serv e i n a military capacit y t o defen d libert y an d pas s i t o n t o thei r sons . From th e earl y nationa l perio d t o th e present , political , military , social , eco nomic, an d cultura l elite s hav e consistentl y urge d youn g male s t o underg o trial by military ordeal to learn self-sacrifice, demonstrat e civi c virtue, and pre pare t o ris k their live s for thei r families , friends , an d fello w citizens . Elite urg ing ha s bee n especiall y intens e a t th e beginning s o f wars, bu t i t ha s als o bee n potent i n peacetime . Fo r example , early-twentieth-centur y civi c leader s pro posed Universa l Militar y Training to transfor m a generation o f ostensibly soft , selfish, effeminat e boy s int o a national forc e o f manly , patrioti c soldiers . De spite periodi c protests , virtuall y ever y generatio n o f youn g America n male s has deferre d t o elite s b y adoptin g martia l values , performin g militi a service ,

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 16 1 joining volunteer companies , enlisting in th e regula r army , or complyin g wit h conscription. 11 To the extent tha t American manhoo d ha s counteracted individualis m an d its associated disorders , i t has played a very conventional role . In Manhood in the Making, Davi d Gilmor e surveys rites of male passage that stretc h fro m Eu rope throug h Afric a an d Asi a acros s th e Pacifi c Ocea n t o Sout h an d Nort h America. Th e globa l similaritie s ar e staggering . Nearl y everywhere , boy s un dergo tria l b y ordea l t o develo p an d demonstrat e manhood . The y lear n self discipline, stoicism, an d fortitude ; the y take on prescribe d responsibilitie s an d perform distinguishe d deeds ; they prove competence throug h th e conques t o f women—all thi s an d mor e t o ear n thei r ticke t int o adul t mal e society . Onc e admitted, th e struggl e continues . The y becom e fathers , providers , an d pro tectors o f families ; an d the y asser t independenc e fro m women , fo r example , by participating i n fraterna l rituals , war games , and wars. Gilmore argue s tha t most culture s mak e a virtue o f manhood t o motivat e youn g male s t o demon strate a "selfles s generosity " fo r thei r familie s an d th e publi c good . Thi s ethi c of selfless generosit y bind s me n int o relativel y cohesiv e fraternitie s tha t enact , administer, an d enforc e th e rule s o f public life. 12 Gilmore i s struck b y th e absenc e o f systemati c rite s o f male passag e i n th e United States . Rober t Moor e an d Dougla s Gillett e agre e tha t "W e n o longe r have a map t o ge t u s to maturity. " Mar k Gerzo n worrie s tha t American male s may be lost i n th e mids t o f uncertainty because , "Ther e i s no ritual—no t sex ual, economic , military , o r generational—tha t ca n confir m masculinity. " American manhoo d seem s makeshift , diffuse , an d ambiguous . Ho w doe s a boy become a man? Shoul d hi s father sen d hi m o n Bo y Scout camp-outs , em phasize academic achievement, pus h athleti c prowess, or consign him t o a drill sergeant? Shoul d th e bo y focu s o n physica l siz e and musculature , intelligenc e and wit , fearlessnes s i n th e fac e o f danger, o r futur e productivit y an d wealth ? When h e comes of age, should a young male cultivate mechanical skills , grou p leadership, manageria l savvy , and the n stoi c dignit y i n th e agin g process? Th e answers have varied by time, place, religion, region , class , and race . The Amer ican roa d t o manhoo d ha s crisscrosse d traditiona l patriarcha l authority , aris tocratic gentility , republica n simplicity , an d libera l self-interes t a s well a s filial obedience bu t als o filial rebellion , courag e an d conques t i n som e circum stances bu t self-restrain t an d civilit y i n others . America' s exemplar s o f man hood hav e include d sobe r Ne w Englan d Puritans , Georgi a dir t farmers , Philadelphia artisans , wester n frontiersmen , souther n cavaliers , northeaster n entrepreneurs, small-tow n Babbitts , white urba n professionals , an d blac k pro fessional athletes. 13 Doe s s o muc h variet y impl y a lack o f coherence ?

162 I The Founders'Gendered Legacy Not necessarily . Thre e thread s o f consistenc y ru n throug h th e variations . One i s tha t manhoo d i s neve r given ; i t mus t b e earned . Eac h bo y ha s t o figure ou t ho w t o achiev e independence , assum e an d satisf y famil y responsibili ties, an d asser t authorit y ove r wome n an d othe r dependent s i n orde r t o gai n access to th e differentia l payoff s o f patriarchy. Eac h bo y learns, "I t take s wor k to becom e a man. " Analogously , eac h mal e generatio n mus t measur e u p t o prior generations . I n th e Wa r o f 1812 , Michae l Rogi n remarks , "America s sons" sough t t o "vindicat e th e birthrigh t o f thei r revolutionar y father s . . . t o acquire manl y authority. " Geral d Linderma n attribute s a post-Civil Wa r "re vival o f th e militar y spirit " t o effort s b y a new generatio n o f male s t o ear n it s manhood b y waging wa r agains t rampan t individualis m an d routin e civilia n life.14 I n Unite d State s history, al l white male s were born wit h libert y but onl y meritorious whit e male s acquire d th e respect , recognition , an d reputatio n as sociated wit h manly liberty . The secon d commo n threa d i s tha t manhoo d demand s self-discipline . Peter Filene observes that American male s achieve manhood "b y earnest, ofte n desperate suppressio n o f instincts. " The y mus t contro l passion s an d maste r impulses t o gain fraterna l trus t a s husbands, fathers , neighbors , workers, busi nessmen, citizens , soldiers , an d leaders . I n addition , the y nee d t o strik e a balance betwee n self-interes t an d socia l regard . The y achiev e manl y indepen dence an d integrit y a s ends i n themselve s bu t als o a s a means t o ear n a goo d name an d reputatio n amon g worth y men . Moreover , the y mus t continu e t o exhibit self-disciplin e an d socia l consciousnes s throughou t thei r entir e lif e span. A man's plac e in th e peckin g orde r i s always tenuous. H e canno t res t o n past laurel s becaus e competitor s ar e alway s poise d t o rais e themselve s u p b y bringing hi m down . Eve n ol d me n mus t struggl e fo r manhood . Cotto n Mather wrot e tha t the y ha d t o measur e u p t o manl y standard s o f "sobriety , gravity, temperance, orthodoxy , charity , an d patience " o r suffer invectiv e suc h as this: "For them tha t stagger with age , at the same time to stagger with drink ; to se e a n ol d ma n reeling , spewing , stinkin g wit h th e excesse s o f th e tavern , 'tis to o loathsom e a thin g t o b e mentione d withou t a ver y zealou s detesta tion." 15 The thir d unifyin g threa d i s that male s must procreat e t o achieve full man hood. Th e founders ' belie f tha t manhoo d involve d procreatin g a sober , re sponsible sel f reappear s i n "th e grea t legen d o f American life " tha t me n ca n "start ove r again, " fo r example , b y followin g self-improvemen t manual s an d twelve-step program s tha t promis e renewe d health , virtue , wisdom, an d hap piness. The founders ' consensu s tha t manhoo d involve d givin g birth t o fami lies i s especiall y eviden t amon g moder n me n wh o hir e femal e surrogate s t o

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 16 3

bear thei r geneti c heirs . The founders ' admiratio n fo r me n wh o procreate d communities an d nation s resurface s amon g contemporar y planner s an d de velopers who carv e new suburbs ou t o f old farmland , activist s who establis h community organizations , and subcultures tha t creat e their own lifestyle en claves. The threa d o f mal e procreatio n i s especiall y dens e i n mythopoetica l masculinism. Robert Bly wants boys to tap into "male spirit" to achieve a "second birth" into manhood. Moor e and Gillett e want th e modern ma n t o find "procreative energy " t o becom e "th e Procreator"— a fathe r o f childre n an d steward of the world whose "blood nourishes the earth as fertilizing semen" to bring "cal m i n th e mids t o f chaos. " Trul y worth y me n procreat e "orde r through determined action." 16 Why d o moder n America n me n weav e thes e traditiona l thread s o f man hood int o thei r personal , social , an d politica l lives ? On e answe r i s tha t th e founders se t a powerful preceden t when they used the language and norms of manhood t o stabiliz e mal e identity , secur e socia l order , an d legitimiz e ne w governments amid the sweeping changes of the late eighteenth century. Since then, new generations of American males have forsaken som e of the language of manhood bu t continue to rely on its consensual norms to give meaning to mortality, fit int o fraterna l society , fix their plac e i n th e peckin g order , an d share in the heroics of leaders seeking calm amidst chaos. The founders' com mitment to manhood no w constitutes the conservative core of contemporary liberalism.

Manhood and Mortality By the eighteenth century , Phillipe Aries argues, a profound chang e occurred in Western men's attitude toward death. Premodern men shared a sense of collective destiny. Deat h was familiar, no t fearsome . Me n were socialized t o accept nature's order and expected to live on through thei r communities. With the ris e of individualism, moder n me n bega n t o pu t a premium o n sel f and material interest. They saw death less as a natural part of their collective destiny and mor e as an assaul t on thei r individualit y an d accumulate d treasure . Death becam e " a transgression" tha t rupture d th e fabri c o f men' s live s an d plunged them "into an irrational, violent... world." How did men cope with impending rupture and chaos? They gave meaning to mortality by perpetuating the memory of the dead. Aries observes, "Memory conferred o n the dead a sort of immortality." 17 American colonists refused t o surrender to death. The common ma n sired

164 I The Founders'Gendered Legacy

sons to continue his seed, name, and memory into the next generation while the gentleman also performed notable deeds meant to be remembered by worthy friend s an d countrymen . Thi s refusa l outlaste d th e Revolution an d na tionhood. America n me n stil l hope d t o chea t deat h b y protecting an d pro moting famil y dynastie s tha t honore d th e memorie s o f dea d patriarch s an d paved th e way for futur e ones . They sustaine d patriarcha l memorie s b y paying hyperbolic homage to family fathers an d civic fathers. They initiated prolonged funera l watche s i n forma l famil y parlors ; the watches were occasion s to honor dead patriarchs and the parlors were architectural testament s to th e deceased's gentilit y an d patrimony . The y als o generate d memory-lade n op tions for disposing of paternal corpses . Some sons cremated fathers, gathere d the ashes into urns, and placed the urns on home altars; others invested in the American revival of the ancient Egyptian art of embalming to transform dea d fathers int o durable cadavers; still others buried fathers i n new-style cemeter ies that marked family plots with engraved stone monuments that proclaimed family surname s i n perpetuity . Individua l effort s t o memorializ e famil y dy nasties wer e mirrore d b y publi c effort s t o hono r dea d heroe s wit h durabl e stone statues. 18 Most America n me n sough t t o perpetuat e famil y dynastie s b y fatherin g sons t o carr y thei r seeds , names , estates , an d memorie s int o th e future . Ja y Fliegelman notes tha t eighteenth-centur y American s adopte d Lockea n par enting techniques tha t were especially conducive t o men's search fo r immor tality. A Lockean fathe r educate d hi s sons to steward th e family dynasty . H e used affectio n an d discipline , prais e an d shame, an d reaso n an d emotio n t o teach boys appropriate manl y virtues and abilities. When h e died, th e fathe r would "b e immortalize d i n hi s child, " wh o woul d continu e th e famil y line . Alternatively, grandfather s hope d t o immortaliz e themselve s i n thei r grand sons. Fo r example , American me n occasionall y dre w u p will s tha t bypasse d sons and sons-in-law in favor of grandsons. New Yorker David Haines "named his grandso n an d namesake " hi s primar y heir , whil e on e Chesapeak e ma n hoped to protect his estate from a wasteful son-in-la w by bequeathing it to as yet unborn grandsons. 19 This fondness fo r male procreativity as a source of immortality was rooted in biblica l imager y of male fecundity tha t reemerge d i n seventeenth-centur y England a s politica l philosophy . Referrin g t o Si r Rober t Filmer' s argumen t that "Eve . .. i s not created ab initio but from Adam, who is thus in a sense her parent," Carole Pateman comments , "Filmer is able to treat all political righ t as the right of the father because the patriarchal father has the creative powers of both a mother an d a father . . . who is complete in himself." English con -

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 16 5

tract theorist s refuted Filme r b y transferring mal e procreativity from a single patriarchal father t o the fraternity o f patriarchal father s who, by mutual con sent, "giv e birth t o a n 'artificial ' body , th e bod y politi c an d civi l society." A subtheme was that founding father s immortalize d themselve s in their biological and political offspring. James Harrington suggeste d that a man becam e a father t o "raise himself a pillar, a golden pillar for his monument... hi s own reviving flesh, and a kind o f immortality." The founder o f a republic create d "beautiful orde r out of chaos" to raise an even grander monument t o himself. John Locke also joined procreativity to immortality. He attacked "waste " and "spoilage" as squandered valu e but applaude d labo r an d mone y for enablin g men t o procreat e value , amas s i t withou t spoilage , an d cheat deat h b y be queathing i t t o futur e generations . In turn , me n safeguarde d accumulate d value by procreating a political society able to protect it. 20 The American founder s linke d mal e procreativit y an d immortalit y whe n they praised me n wh o founde d an d fostere d famil y dynasties ; acquired, set tled, worked , an d bequeathe d land ; establishe d fraterna l organization s an d communities; an d procreate d ne w constitution s an d governments . Th e founders' descendant s continue to identify mal e procreativity with immortal ity. Modern Americans ofte n pit y bachelors who have no legitimate biologi cal heirs to perpetuate thei r name s bu t hono r responsibl e fathers an d dotin g grandfathers who procreate and provision new generations. They applaud citizens who earn reputable names and elect national leaders who promise to do memorable deeds. Indeed, American male s of all classes and race s are experts at th e "Remembe r Me " game . Boy s carv e thei r name s int o schoo l desktop s and wet cement; youth gang s and tagge r crew s spray-paint thei r name s ont o neighborhood fences and highway overpasses; construction workers etch their names into steel infrastructures; ric h men donate millions to have their names attached to college buildings and charitable foundations; an d powerful politi cians (such as the Kennedys and the Bushes) transmit clout across generations to affix thei r family name s to political dynasties. Why hav e American male s bee n s o concerned wit h memorializin g them selves? Mary O'Brien suggests the possibility that men tend to be obsessed with immortality becaus e they play a minor, temporar y par t i n huma n reproduc tion. Men copulate , ejaculate, an d the n remai n idl e while women carry , bear, nurse, an d nurtur e futur e generations . The resul t i s tha t me n fee l separate d from th e birthing experience and from an y affective sens e of biological conti nuity. They are "isolated in their individual historicity." Seeking to escape this isolation, me n commandee r culture , law , an d coercio n t o reduc e th e uncer tainty of their paternity and to build family dynasties that promise to fill them

166 I The Founders' Gendered Legacy

with a sense of historical continuity. Their desperatio n i s evident in the extraordinary amount of time, resources, energy, and effort the y invest in legitimizing patriarchal prerogative and fixing their places as fathers o f posterity.21 Robert Jay Lifton propose s a related possibility. He believes that men have a deep psychological need "to maintain [them ] selves as part of the great chain of being." To satisfy thi s need, me n "requir e the symbolization o f that conti nuity, imaginativ e form s o f transcending death , i n orde r t o confron t th e fac t that we die." Lifton identifie s five symbolic modes o f transcending death . I n the biological/social mode, men seek continuity by identifying with their children, group, tribe, organization, culture, people, nation, or species. A religious mode assumes that men have an immortal soul and can achieve life after death. The creative mode enables men to endure through their works of art, literature, and science or through their influence on family and friends. The fourth mod e involves men's identification wit h nature as an eternal force that precedes and postdates individua l lives . Finally, an experientia l mod e refer s t o intens e psychic experiences that temporaril y free me n fro m fea r o f death. J. Glen n Gra y provides a useful example. He observes that combat soldiers sometimes experience a "sense of power and liberation" when risking their lives for comrades. It is as if "nothing less than the assurance of immortality . . . makes self-sacrific e at these moments so relatively easy."22 O'Brien define s th e mal e ques t fo r immortalit y i n oppositio n t o femal e maternalism, bu t Lifto n i s ambivalent . O n th e on e hand , h e observe s tha t women who survive major historica l discontinuitie s suc h a s Nazi concentra tion camps and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima employ the same strategies as me n t o reaffir m lif e an d reestablis h a sens e o f continuity . O n th e othe r hand, he speculates that women's "close identification with organic life and its perpetuation" ma y produce i n women a n "organic " conservatism tha t stead ies them durin g times of change. On thi s view, women's relativ e calm i n th e midst of crisis stands in contrast to men's anxiety over the ebb and flow of fortune.23 Lifton doe s not resolv e his ambivalence. However, he does allege that men ar e deepl y threatene d b y disorder s associate d wit h change , crisis , an d death, and that they engage in strenuous efforts t o reestablish a symbolic sense of continuity and immortality . These efforts ofte n involv e the procreation of surrogate families. Throughout American history, young men tor n fro m thei r biological families t o fight the nation' s wars have been initiate d int o substitut e militar y familie s (units ) that includ e brother s (fello w soldiers ) an d fathe r figures (officers ) wh o promise to lead them to victory. Since the nineteenth century, young men migrating fro m farm s t o citie s hav e joine d extende d familie s tha t forme d i n

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 16 7

home-styled bordering houses, institutions such as the Young Mens Christia n Association (YMCA) , an d fraternitie s suc h a s th e Orde r o f Od d Fellows . Lifron perceive s men' s tendenc y t o procreat e surrogat e familie s a s especiall y intense durin g revolutions . A rebel might sustai n a sense of continuity ami d violence by identifying himsel f with " a vast 'family reachin g back to what he perceives to be the historical beginnings of his revolution an d extending infi nitely int o th e future. " H e participate s i n " a socially created famil y . . . a s a mode of immortality." His family is often governe d by a beloved father figure. Lifton suggest s that Chines e revolutionarie s perceive d Ma o Tse-tung to b e a heroic patriarch who could transform "th e most extreme threat of disintegration int o a n ordered certaint y of mission" and conver t "incapacitatin g deat h anxiety into a death-conquering calm of near invincibility." He believes, however, that Western men are more apt to feel a sense of "symbolic fatherlessness" and engag e i n endles s experiment s t o reconcil e patriarcha l norm s tha t giv e meaning, significance , an d stabilit y to thei r lives with th e frightful opennes s and uncertainty of the future. 24 An importan t elemen t i n th e American founders ' gendere d legac y was a challenge to future generations of males to reconcile the relatively unchanging norms o f manhood tha t ordere d men' s lives with th e rhetori c o f liberty an d equality that justified opennes s but admitted uncertainties associated with social instability an d politica l disarra y i n th e rank s o f men. Bot h th e founder s and their heirs addressed this challenge by employing criteria of manly merit to encourage self-restraint i n the exercise of liberty and to establish stabl e hierarchies in civil society.

Manhood and Civil Society The founders fel t tha t most men's standing in civil society depended o n thei r performances a s family patriarchs and neighbors. Fatherhood was a social responsibility. A proper father, John Demo s observes, raised his sons to "reflec t credit" on him and his family's "goo d name." He also mastered local codes of civility to confirm membershi p and achieve respectability in his community. 25 Civility was a particularly useful marke r of a man's standing in a society where formal ranks were being contested and abolished. It was an equal opportunit y virtue. Theoretically, ever y white mal e who sough t socia l recognitio n coul d learn th e appropriate disposition s an d exhibi t th e proper manner s neede d t o climb the social ladder. At the same time, civility legitimized hierarchy. Some men neve r learned th e basics; most me n achieve d adequacy; a select numbe r

168 I The Founders'Gendered Legacy picked u p importan t subtleties ; bu t onl y a fe w me n mastere d it s intricacies . Because the common ma n ha d a chance to gain a "foothold i n the ranks of polite society," he was less likely to resen t subordinatio n t o social elites and mor e apt t o respec t socia l superior s a s "model s o f manhood " worth y o f emulation . Don Sab o remind s u s tha t intermal e hierarch y usuall y beckon s low-rankin g men "t o clim b it s heights " rathe r tha n contes t it s inequalities. 26 The founders ' commitmen t t o civilit y as a key criterion fo r socia l standin g was symbolize d b y thei r elevatio n o f Georg e Washingto n t o th e highes t ran k of manhood an d highes t office i n th e land. Washington th e child entered rule s of civility int o hi s copybook , an d Washingto n th e adul t practice d thos e rule s to attrac t extraordinar y publi c esteem . Richar d Bushma n report s tha t grea t concern fo r civilit y resurfaced amon g nineteenth-centur y patrician s hoping t o save gentilit y fro m democrac y a s well a s i n nineteenth-centur y advic e book s that counsele d aspirant s t o middle-clas s respectabilit y t o develo p an d practic e pleasing dispositions tha t elevate d characte r an d improve d busines s prospects . The ethi c of civility endures i n th e twentiet h centur y amon g upper-clas s me n who cultivat e country-clu b manners , entrepreneur s wh o see k socia l re spectability, an d professional s whos e code s o f ethic s announc e thei r commit ment t o emplo y expertis e t o serv e rathe r tha n t o exploi t th e public. 27 The manl y ethi c o f civilit y i s especiall y importan t amon g minorit y male s and othe r margina l men . Mitchel l Duneier' s stud y of "race, respectability, an d masculinity" reveal s th e intricat e code s o f manhood , self-worth , an d socia l standing tha t ordere d relationship s amon g a grou p o f older , mostl y Africa n American me n wh o frequente d a restauran t o n Chicago' s Sout h Side . Thes e men articulate d an d adhere d t o masculin e norm s o f speech, style , an d actio n that honored persona l responsibility , inne r strength, expressiveness , pride, sin cerity, honesty , genuineness , caring , an d civility . Th e me n wh o excelle d a t these virtues perceive d themselve s an d wer e perceived b y others i n thei r circl e as manly , meritorious , respectable , an d dignified . The y too k grea t prid e i n being know n a s men o f "highe r self-worth, " a s "elevated " beings . I n contrast , those men wh o faile d t o exhibi t civi l dispositions an d manl y conduc t suffere d personal pai n an d socia l disdain . They stake d thei r persona l hono r o n norm s of manhoo d an d punishe d themselve s fo r fallin g short ; the y wer e accepte d into th e grou p o n th e basi s o f thes e norm s bu t los t statu s an d eve n member ship fo r failin g t o liv e u p t o them. 28 Relatedly, a grou p o f elderl y Jewis h immigrant s wh o belonge d t o a com munity cente r i n Venice , California , create d thei r ow n informa l code s o f ci vility. Barbar a Myerhof f examine s ho w member s trie d t o maintai n a sense o f personal integrit y an d socia l dignit y a s they cope d wit h th e dependenc e asso -

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 16 9 dated wit h ol d age and with fear s founde d o n proximit y t o death . "Thei r self esteem," Myerhoff writes, "wa s based on th e maintenance o f honor, decorum , and dignity. " Thei r particula r cod e o f hono r include d self-discipline , inde pendence, articulateness , an d generosity . Fo r example, members too k prid e i n being donors t o need y causes but were deeply insulted b y the meres t hin t tha t they themselve s wer e needy . Thi s insistenc e tha t the y controlle d thei r live s "enabled the m t o maintai n thei r standin g a s people o f honor " committe d t o the "America n value s o f democrac y an d equality. " Simultaneously , the y greatly value d "individua l merit, " perceive d "clear , importan t difference s i n human worth, " wer e acutel y attune d t o smal l an d larg e breache s i n civility , and stake d thei r dignity , membership , an d reputation s o n earnin g an d main taining hig h socia l standin g i n th e group. 29 Duneier's stud y focuse s o n a n all-mal e communit y wher e th e prevailin g codes emphasized manhoo d an d civilit y as key sources of social standing. My erhoff's stud y examine s a communit y o f me n an d women , emphasizin g th e importance tha t famil y playe d i n determinin g people' s standing . Sh e suggest s that "th e ol d wome n ha d th e dec k stacke d i n thei r favor " becaus e the y kep t closer tie s with childre n an d receive d th e mos t credi t whe n th e childre n wer e highly educated , wel l married , an d goo d parents . Still , me n achieve d socia l standing b y assertin g responsibilit y fo r an d demonstratin g achievemen t i n perpetuating thei r famil y dynasties . On e elderl y man wrot e a n autobiograph y which h e intende d t o b e rea d a t famil y gathering s afte r hi s death . H e ex plained t o hi s childre n tha t th e book' s purpos e wa s "t o dra w ou t th e threa d o f our family , i n orde r tha t you r childre n an d grandchildre n wil l hav e som e un derstanding o f thei r origins. " The autho r gaine d socia l credi t b y bequeathin g to hi s famil y "th e concep t o f perpetual continuity." 30 The nor m o f manl y civilit y persist s toda y a s a putative sourc e o f fraterna l cohesion. Moor e an d Gillett e sugges t tha t matur e me n ar e no t selfish , mate rialistic, or aggressive . Instead, the y are genuinely concerne d abou t othe r peo ple, cooperat e wit h them , an d sacrific e fo r them . Matur e me n care —about their children , othe r men , th e community , th e environment , th e world , an d posterity. Matur e me n wh o engag e i n legitimat e stat e violenc e care —about the libert y an d safet y o f thei r familie s an d th e friendship , camaraderie , an d mutual ai d o f fello w citizens , polic e officers , o r soldiers . Matur e me n fearfu l of social disorde r an d stree t violenc e care —about th e triump h o f civilit y ove r criminality. The poin t i s not tha t American me n ar e carin g creature s bu t tha t they ofte n associat e matur e manhoo d wit h concer n an d sacrific e fo r others . Garrison Keillo r explain s in The Book of Guys, "We try to becom e carin g men , good husbands , grea t fathers , goo d citizens , despite th e fac t tha t guy s are fun -

170 I The Founders' Gendered Legacy

damentally unfaithful. " Th e me n mos t likel y t o achiev e hig h standin g i n American societ y ar e no t necessaril y radica l individualists, sexua l predators , abusive husbands , ruthles s capitalists , o r highl y authoritaria n personalities . Instead, they tend to be men who subscribe to the very ethic of care that Carol Gilligan identifies with women. 31

Manhood and Politics Mainstream manhoo d i s mundane . I t involve s settlin g int o monogamou s marriages, siring and raising children, earning money and paying bills. It is the daily grind o f restraining lus t outsid e marriag e an d exercisin g responsibilit y within it , winnin g brea d an d breedin g heirs . Mainstream citizenshi p i s passive. It entails listening to television news, obeying laws, paying taxes, and periodically voting. The one transcendent feature of both manhood and citizenship is an indirect associatio n with heroism . Average American me n ca n vicariously experience "the magnetic field of the deep masculine" by identifyin g with th e procreativ e "Zeu s energy " o f heroi c me n an d hegemoni c leaders . They ma y imagin e themselve s heroe s but , i n politics, the y mostl y see k ou t heroic rulers to solve public problems and fulfill nationa l promise. American men ten d t o coupl e mundane manhoo d an d passiv e citizenship t o compen satory hero worship. 32 Since the founding era , few American me n hav e sought t o transform lib erty into radical libertarianism o r to push equality toward radical egalitarian ism. American me n have rarely used liberty as a pretext for contestin g the legitimacy o f the U.S . Constitution o r promote d equalit y a s a gateway to socialism. With important exceptions, they have mostly complied with laws and leaders, and occasionally offered enthusiasti c support t o presidents who exercised extraordinar y powe r an d prerogative . Eugen e Deb s recognize d an d re gretted American men s tendency to sacrifice democrati c self-government fo r passive quiescence to leaders. He regularly refused t o assume official Socialis t Party leadership and gave this explanation: "Too long have the workers of the world waited for some Moses to lead them out of bondage. He has not come; he will never come. I would not lead you out if I could; for if you could be led out, you coul d b e led back again." 33 Ironically , Debs' s refusal, lik e Washington's reticence to accept public office, mad e his leadership that much more influential, lasting, and memorable . Does thi s recor d o f political passivit y impl y tha t th e founders ' obsessiv e fears o f disorderly me n wer e exaggerated ? Loui s Hart z think s so . He argue s

The Founders' Gendered Legacy I 17 1

that earl y Americans an d thei r leader s were "unite d o n a liberal way of life" that focused o n individual rights and economic opportunities. The founders ' attempt to ensure order by installing a powerful nationa l government was political overkill . Hart z states , "Th e America n majorit y ha s bee n a n amiabl e shepherd dog kept forever on a lion's leash." Gordon Wood disagrees. He suggests that the founders' fear s were warranted bu t their new science of politics suppressed muc h o f the disorder. The founder s implemente d a Constitutio n that freed men' s acquisitive appetites bu t harnesse d thei r political ambitions . Henceforth, America n me n pursue d thei r economi c interest s with littl e rea son t o see k political powe r o r resis t political leadership. 34 Bot h explanation s are incomplete becaus e the y d o no t recogniz e tha t th e founders ' hegemoni c norms o f manhoo d helpe d stabiliz e libera l citizenshi p an d authoriz e excep tional leaders to override institutional restraints . Early American liberalis m containe d a conservative core requirement tha t mature me n giv e up th e Bachelor' s pleasure s fo r th e Famil y Man's responsi bilities. This was crucial fo r establishin g an d maintainin g orde r i n th e rank s of men. The Bachelor sought liberty without responsibility whereas the Family Ma n defende d libert y an d exercise d i t wit h self-restraint . Th e Bachelo r transformed libert y into licentiousness but th e Family Man practiced a sober productivity an d fraterna l civility . The Bachelo r kne w n o authorit y bu t hi s own desires while the Family Man recognized, admired, and followed the Better Sort who manage d th e Republic and the Heroic Man who guided i t int o the future. Ultimately, the Family Man was a political moderate who could be trusted t o practic e discipline d individualis m an d deferen t citizenship . Hi s moderate disposition , i n turn , create d a cushion o f legitimacy tha t enable d great leaders to wield prerogative regardless of adverse public opinion or legal restraints. The Famil y Man' s mundan e manhoo d an d passiv e citizenshi p acquire d transcendent meanin g throug h her o worship . Th e Famil y Ma n share d i n manly heroism not by emulating it but by honoring it, for example, in Fourth of July orations that commemorated pioneerin g fathers. The Family Man en gaged in political procreativity not by exemplifying it but by adoring it, for example, i n electio n sermon s tha t trace d moder n citizenshi p bac k t o heroi c founders o f cities, constitutions, an d republics . This version o f hero worship encouraged men to find political meaning primarily in the past rather than to take heroic initiative in the present. By 1783, the founders were enjoining me n to "venerate the memories and long perpetuate the names of those who guided the hel m throughou t th e storm. " Afte r 1789 , Michae l Lienesc h notes , th e founders sough t to secure political stability by suggesting that "heroic politics

172 I The Founders'Gendered Legacy

existed onl y in th e past, th e duty of Americans being to revere the founders , remembering thei r illustriou s deeds , applaudin g thei r magnificen t govern ment, an d cherishing their hallowed Constitution." 35 Nineteenth-century male s did not resign themselves to a mixture of mundane manhood an d reverenc e for dea d political leaders. They also worshiped living heroes such a s the Jacksonian frontiersma n an d th e Gilded Age entrepreneur. These new ideals incorporated ol d norms such as manly liberty and procreativity but lacked the key characteristic that elevated manhood from th e secular to the sacred: self-sacrifice fo r th e public good. The frontiersman an d the entrepreneu r wer e possessive individualist s who , a t best , mad e a self-in terested, circuitous, and suspect contribution to the public good. Only the citizen soldier could claim the civic virtue associated with unselfish patriotism — but he was about to be replaced by the professional soldier . By the end of "the Masculine Century, " man y commentator s feared , America n manhoo d no t only was routinized, bureaucratized , an d effeminize d bu t als o was lacking in redeeming heroic value.36 The turn of the twentieth century witnessed a conjuncture o f political radicalism an d renewe d emphasi s o n heroism . America n elite s dreaded th e prospect of millions of American and immigrant men exchanging citizen passivity for th e class conflict manifeste d i n anarchist, populist , an d socialist activism agains t th e capitalis t order . Elite s deployed economi c policy , politica l co-optation, an d militar y coercion t o control activist s but the y also initiated efforts t o educat e an d channe l youn g me n awa y from politica l engagemen t into a sort o f subdued heroism . They calle d o n boy s t o recaptur e th e fron tiersman's fortitude by participating in planned Boy Scout outings; they counseled youth to exhibit the entrepreneur's competitiveness i n organized sports; they urged young men to practice martial virtue by enrolling in military training programs. National elite s were convinced tha t long-ter m stabilit y i n th e ranks of men required that young men infuse greate r meaning into manhoo d by participating in managed heroics. 37 William Jame s an d Randolp h Bourn e agree d tha t America n me n crave d transcendent political meaning. However, they expressed pacifist fears that the glorification o f heroism ofte n reinforce d an d legitimize d youn g men' s mos t aggressive, violent, warlik e tendencies . Their solutio n wa s t o devis e a moral equivalent to war that would engage young men in self-sacrifice, develo p their procreative abilities, and allow them to experience real heroism by way of public participation an d service . They propose d tha t youn g me n enlis t i n a domestic army and devote several years of their lives to solving the nation's problems. Their proposal was quickly forgotten ami d public enthusiasm fo r Pres-

The Founders' Gendered Legacy I 17 3

ident Woodrow Wilson s decision to bring the United States into a world war that invited a new generation of young males to "enact and repossess" the martial manliness of their fathers, forefathers , an d founding fathers. 38 American men' s hero worship i s now manifested i n a desperate an d ofte n fruitless searc h for grea t political leaders . The founder s se t a precedent whe n they encourage d contemporarie s t o suspen d thei r suspicion s o f political au thority and submit t o the exceptional leadershi p o f the procreative men who bloodied th e Britis h Empire , gave birth t o th e Constitution , sire d a new republic, and nursed it through its infancy. Since then, American men have submitted to patriarchal presidents (often militar y heroes) who promised to unite manly "restraint and responsibility" with "masculine , potent caring " as a way to resolve national crises and realize historic opportunities.39 Today, American men still search for great political leaders only to suffer a sense of disappointment and betrayal. But rather than invigorate liberty and equality by emphasizing democrati c self-governmen t ove r leadership , mos t American me n ap pear to prefer to seek out new political heroes who promise, once again, to infuse manly virtue into public life.

Remember the Ladies The America n founder s die d suspende d i n tim e an d space . The y di d no t know if their republic would undergo classical declension into corruption, followed by anarchy and tyranny, or whether their innovative government would endure into posterity. Thomas Jefferson expresse d optimism just before dying. Unable to travel to Washington, D.C. , to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaratio n o f Independence , h e regrette d missin g th e opportunit y t o meet with "th e remnant o f that host of worthies who joined with u s that day in th e bold an d doubtfu l electio n we were to make for ou r countr y betwee n submission o r the sword." However, he was gratified b y the "consolatory fac t that our fellow citizen s after hal f a century of experience and prosperity continue t o approv e th e choic e we made." 40 The founder s wer e convince d tha t democratic disorde r i n th e rank s o f me n wa s th e primar y threa t t o th e Re public an d the y wer e prou d tha t thei r procreativ e effort s secure d sufficien t hegemony to restore and reinforce orde r in the ranks of men. Simultaneously, th e founders believe d tha t publi c orde r require d th e rul e of me n ove r women . Eighteenth-centur y America s complex , diverse , an d contested cultur e o f manhoo d magnifie d familia l an d socia l instability . I n part, the founders addressed problems of male disorder and gender conflict by

174 I The Founders Gendered Legacy

urging men to assume familial responsibilit y for governing women. They defined manhood against womanhood, assessed male worth in opposition to female vices, expresse d misogynis t attitude s tha t demande d mal e governance , and effectivel y depoliticize d patriarcha l rul e over women. Most founders did not conside r women i n their politica l deliberations . Instead , the y presume d an exclusiv e unit y o f manhood , citizenship , an d leadershi p tha t preclude d women from publi c life. The few founders who wrote about women and politics usually did so to degrade and dismiss women o r to use women t o make a point abou t men . Overall , the founders showe d almos t no interest i n confronting issue s involving women's freedo m an d equality, o r their citizenshi p and leadership . Not surprisingly, the y ignore d Mar y Wollstonecrafr's Vindication of the Rights of Woman, or criticized the author's reputed immoral con duct, or dismissed her ideas as invitations to chaos.41 The founder s perpetuate d patriarchalis m b y promoting a misogynist ide ology which hel d tha t a mature ma n affirmed hi s selfhood b y mastering female depravit y an d governing dependen t women . The very concept o f selfhood was gendered. "When influential thinker s of the late eighteenth centur y pondered the growing claims of the self," Rotundo writes, "they thought only of the male self " A few thinkers such as Judith Sargent Murray spoke in favor of women's autonomy, but their voices were subdued by patriarchal laws and customs tha t require d wome n t o sacrific e subjectivit y fo r the good o f their families and nation. This normative conjuncture o f male selfhood an d female self-sacrifice wa s justified b y socia l contrac t theorie s tha t expande d men' s rights, economic opportunities, and political participation an d by what Car ole Pateman call s the implicit sexua l contrac t tha t reinforce d femal e domes ticity and subordination. The result, Joan Hof f argues , was that the founders created a n endurin g republi c tha t recognize d mal e autonom y bu t require d women's selfless devotion to men. 42 Nonetheless, man y founder s wer e ambivalent abou t th e war between the sexes. The y relie d o n me n t o defen d libert y bu t praise d wome n fo r thei r "manly exertions " and "patriotic zeal" in the cause of liberty. They enjoine d men to practice civility in society but appreciated women who excelled at the "disposition t o please, " whic h elevate d bot h "me n and wome n abov e th e brutes." Furthermore, som e founders wer e convinced tha t me n did not monopolize rationality and women were not wholly consumed by passion. They recognized women' s potentia l fo r reason , promote d femal e education , an d speculated o n women' s intellectua l equalit y wit h men . Meanwhile , mos t founders dwelle d on men's desires, impulses, avarice, and deceitfulness. Eve n relative optimist s suc h a s Benjamin Franklin an d Thomas Jefferson worrie d

The Founders Gendered Legacy I 17 5

about men's tendency to submit to lust, alcohol, gambling, profligacy, luxury , factionalism, an d other vices. In a complex culture of manhood where gender boundaries blurred , gende r opposition becam e a somewhat slipper y founda tion for patriarchy. 43 One o f the mos t innovativ e aspect s o f the founders ' gendere d legac y was their expropriatio n fo r manhoo d o f traditional femal e vice s and virtues. The founders attribute d disorderl y passion s an d procreativ e potential s t o bot h men an d women . Thei r distrus t o f th e Bachelo r a s a symbol fo r disorderl y men was a variation of traditional patriarchal fears of disorderly women. Their support fo r th e Family Man a s a sober citizen was an adaptation o f the con ventional belie f tha t marriag e subdue d femal e passions . Their prais e fo r th e procreative leadershi p o f the Bette r Sor t an d th e Heroi c Ma n represente d a male usurpation o f women's uniqu e abilit y t o giv e birth. Me n wer e just lik e women—but even more so. Thi s quantitativ e differenc e wa s decisive. I f men were mor e disorderl y tha n women , the n disorderl y me n pose d th e greate r danger to the Republic and deserved the highest political priority. If men were more procreative than women, then procreative men positioned themselves as the most qualified peopl e to restore social order and secure political stability . The founders' legacy to posterity included the belief that disorderly men were the mai n proble m o f politic s an d procreativ e me n wer e th e nation' s mai n problem solvers. The founder s inherite d th e traditiona l portrai t o f women a s lustful, ma nipulative, dangerous creatures. However, they expressed a heightened awareness that women's vices were regularly reproduced among men. Most founder s recognized that both women and men were disposed to seduce and were vulnerable t o seduction . Noa h Webste r criticize d lustfu l wome n wh o manipu lated men's passions and deceitful libertine s who preyed on female innocence. He worried that the example of "artless females" who were victimized by rogue lovers was being repeate d amon g mal e citizen s who wer e seduce d b y silver tongued demagogues . Mos t founder s als o recognize d tha t wome n an d me n shared othe r failings . Benjami n Franklin condemne d women' s intemperanc e and men' s "mor e frequent" intemperance . H e curse d women's fickleness and berated men' s "waverin g and inconstant " disposition . John Adam s criticize d women an d me n who exhibited affinitie s towar d "luxury " and relate d "dissipations." Both sexes needed an education in virtue to resist luxury, but not the sort of education tha t produced th e equally "contemptible characters " of the "femme savant" and male "pedant."44 Overall, the founders believed that both sexes were composed of disorderly creatures. However, thes e disorderl y creature s wer e no t equall y subversiv e o f social

ij6 I

The Founders'Gendered Legacy

stability and political peace. The female "coquette, " for example, was a minor irritant an d secondar y sourc e o f socia l conflict . He r selfishness , vanity , an d flirtations threatene d he r ow n well-bein g mor e tha n anythin g else . Hanna h Webster Foster's novel The Coquette told the story of a self-described "young , gay, volatile" woman who refused a virtuous suitor for "a designing libertine," who eventuall y impregnate d an d abandone d he r t o a prematur e death . B y contrast, th e founders believe d that th e male rogue epitomized men' s "ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious" nature. His passions, impulses, and interest s threatened no t onl y hi s ow n healt h an d happines s o r th e fortune s o f a fe w families bu t als o large r socia l bond s an d legitimat e authority . Recal l Joh n Adams's repl y t o Abigail s reques t t o "remembe r th e ladies. " John ridicule d Abigail's concern fo r women bu t expresse d grave fear tha t th e male disorders brought o n by the revolutionary struggle had "loosene d the bands of government everywhere." 45 The founders ' front-lin e remed y for disorderl y me n was an adaptatio n o f the traditional prescription fo r disorderly women: marriage. Both the Family Man and the Goodwife encountere d religious , cultural, and legal pressures to channel lust into marriage, contribute to the family economy, share responsibility for chil d rearing, and practice civility in community affairs. Patriarcha l family lif e afforde d husband s th e authorit y t o manag e thei r wives ' passion s and authorize d piou s wives t o monito r thei r husbands ' morals . Durin g an d after th e Revolution, the founders thickene d both men's and women's marital responsibilities by adding a layer of civic duty. Husbands were to defend thei r rights, families, an d country while wives were to serve as republican mother s who educate d son s t o becom e "virtuou s citizen s o f th e republic." 46 Th e founders encourage d men and women to enter into family life, but their foremost concer n was to get young males settled int o marriage , family responsi bility, and fraternal societ y to ensure family patriarchy, social order, and sober citizenship. In turn, the founders hoped to shield sober citizens from social conflict an d political disarra y b y expropriatin g women' s procreativity . Their gramma r o f manhood declare d tha t mal e procreativity supersede d women' s reproductiv e powers. Procreative men sired sons; women simpl y carried them . Procreativ e men produced an d protected liberty, mixed their blood with the land to generate moral value and economic wealth, and established social bonds that created civil society; women simply enjoyed th e fruits o f men's liberty, labor, and society. Procreative men frame d constitutions , establishe d governments , an d ran them; women simply lived under them. The founders believe d that a few heroic men monopolized the extraordinary procreativity needed to father a re-

The Founders'Gendered Legacy I 17 7

public an d transmi t i t t o posterity ; the y use d th e languag e an d concept s o f manhood t o encourag e mos t othe r me n an d requir e all women t o acquiesc e to their leadership. More than tw o hundred years later, American politics still privileges problems associated with disorderly men. These problems include domestic crime and internationa l conflict . Th e mai n perpetrator s o f violence i n bot h arena s are disorderly men—fro m thieve s an d murderer s t o terrorist s an d dictators . American leaders give priority to addressing these problems, often i n the name of protecting innocent women. A usual result is to trivialize matters related to women's liberty and equality. When innocen t bystander s are getting killed in drive-by shootings and American soldiers are put in harms way, issues involving domestic abuse or reproductive right s readily become back-burner items. Equally important, America n politic s stil l favor s mal e procreativity a s a primary source of public policy. Men's preferred mean s to address national problems is to identify an d rel y on a few heroic men t o asser t hegemonic leader ship, for example , to conquer crim e and win war. Manly leaders who exhibi t a proper combination o f resolution and tenderness, integrity and civility, and self-discipline an d selfles s generosit y ca n coun t o n mos t citizen s t o compl y with thei r initiatives . To th e exten t tha t me n ar e stil l see n a s th e principa l problem and problem solvers in American public life, the founders succeede d beyond all expectations to establish an enduring republic of men.

Notes

NOTES T O TH E I N T R O D U C T I O N

i. Susa n Juster, Disorderly Women: Sexual Politics and Evangelicalism in Revolutionary New England(Ithaca: Cornel l University Press, 1994), 138 . 2. Joh n Witherspoon, quoted in Jan Lewis, "The Republican Wife: Virtue and Seduction i n th e Earl y Republic, " William and Mary Quarterly\ 3 d ser. , 4 4 (Octobe r 1987): 709; Carroll Smith-Rosenberg in Linda K. Kerber, Nancy R Cott, Lyn n Hunt , Carroll Smith-Rosenberg , an d Christin e Stansell , "Forum : Beyon d Roles , Beyon d Spheres: Thinking about Gender in the Early Republic," William and Mary Quarterly\ 3d ser., 64 (July 1989): 573. 3. Thoma s Paine , "Commo n Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings of Thomas Paine, ed. Phili p S . Fone r (Ne w York : Citade l Press , 1961) , 23 ; Stanley Griswold , "Overcoming Evil with Good" (1801) , in Political Sermons of the American Founding Era, 1750-180$, ed . Elli s Sando z (Indianapolis : Libert y Press , 1991) , 1552 ; Samue l Sherwood, "Scriptura l Instruction s t o Civi l Rulers " (1774) , i n Ibid. , 377-78 ; John Witherspoon, "Th e Dominio n o f Providence ove r th e Passion s o f Men" (1776) , in Ibid., 556. NOTES T O CHAPTE R I

i. Judit h Sargen t Murray, "Sketch o f the Present Situatio n i n America" (1794) , in Selected Writings of Judith Sargent Murray, ed. Sharo n M . Harri s (Ne w York: Oxfor d University Press, 1995), 52. 2. E . Anthony Rotundo, "Patriarchs and Participants: A Historical Perspective on Fatherhood i n th e Unite d States, " i n Beyond Patriarchy: Essays by Men on Pleasure, Power, and Change, ed . Michael Kaufma n (Toronto : Oxfor d Universit y Press , 1987), 65-67; idem , American Manhood: Transformations in Masculinity from the Revolution to the Modern Era (New York: Basic Books, 1993), 11—14; Melvin Yazawa, From Colonies to Commonwealth: Familial Ideology and the Beginnings of the American Republic (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985), 46; John Demos, Past, Present, and Personal: The Family and the Life Course in American History (New York: Oxford Univer sity Press, 1986), 27—28, 44—45; idem, A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony (Oxford: Oxfor d Universit y Press, 1970), part 2. 3. Juster , Disorderly Women, 35—38; anonymous Virginian , quote d i n Mar y Bet h

179

180 I Notes to Chapter i Norton, Liberty's Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women, 1750-1800 (Boston: Little, Brown & Co. , 1980), 43; Nancy F. Cott, "Eighteenth-Cen tury Famil y and Socia l Life Reveale d i n Massachusett s Divorc e Records, " in A Heritage of HerOwn: Toward a New Social History of American Women, ed. Nancy F. Cott and Elizabet h H . Plec k (Ne w York: Simon & Schuster , 1979) , 120; see also Edmun d Morgan, "Th e Puritans and Sex," New England Quarterly 15 (1942): 591-607. 4. Mar y Noyes Silliman, quoted i n Joy Day Buel and Richard Buel , Jr., The Way of Duty: A Woman and Her Family in Revolutionary America (New York: Norton, 1984), 230-31; Benjamin Franklin , "Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, &c." (1751), in Writings, ed. J. A. Leon Lemay (New York: Library of America, 1987), 368; George Washington t o Marquis de Lafayette, July 25,1785, in George Washington: A Collection, ed . W. B . Allen (Indianapolis : Libert y Press , 1988), 304; Thomas Jefferson t o Jean Baptiste Say, February 1,1804, in The Portable Thomas Jefferson, ed. Merrill D. Peterson (New York: Viking Press, 1975), 498; see also Norton, Liberty's Daughters, 6y. 5. Joh n Gregor y an d Pennsylvania Magazine quoted i n Jay Fliegelman , Prodigals and Pilgrims: The American Revolution against Patriarchal Authority, 1750-1800 (Cambridge: Cambridge Universit y Press , 1982), 44, 124-25; Hannah Webste r Foster , The Coquette; or, the History of ElizaWharton (1797), in The Heath Anthology of American Literature, ed. Pau l Lauter , 2 vols., 2 d ed . (Lexington , Mass. : D . C . Heat h & Co. , 1994), 1:1160; Judith Sargen t Murray, "The Story of Margaretta" (1792-94) , in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 174-75 . 6. Laure l Thatcher Ulrich , "Vertuou s Women Found : Ne w Englan d Ministeria l Literature, 1668-173 5," in Cott an d Pleck, eds., A Heritage of HerOwn, 68; Benjamin Franklin, "Reply to a Piece of Advice" (1735), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 248-50; see also Glenna Matthews, The Rise of Public Woman: Woman's Power and Women's Place in the United States, 1630-1970 (New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1992), chaps. 1-2 . 7. Demos , Past, Present, and Personal, 46 , 153—54 ; Caro l Shammas , Marylyn n Salmon, an d Miche l Dahlin , Lnheritance in America: From Colonial Times to the Present (New Brunswick: Rutger s University Press, 1987), 56—57; artisans quoted i n Gor don S . Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution (New York: Knopf, 1992) , 246; see also Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 204 . 8. Wood , Radicalism, 43. 9. Fliegelman , Prodigals and Pilgrims, 1 ; see also Lawrence Stone, The Family, Sex, and Marriage in England, 1500—1800 (New York: Harper & Row, 1977), chap. 6. 10. Gordo n J. Schochet, The Authoritarian Family and Political Attitudes in Seventeenth-Century England: Patriarchalism in Political Thought (New Brunswick , N.J. : Transaction Books , 1988) , 14—15, 57, 65—67; Antonia Fraser , The Weaker Vessel (New York: Random House , 1984), 41, 60-63, 7 I_ 7 2 5148; see also John Toland, The Militia Reform'd; or an Easy Scheme of FurnishingEngland with a Constant Land Force capable to prevent or to subdue any Forein Power, and to maintain perpetual Quiet at Home, without endangering the Publick Liberty (London: John Darby , 1698), 83—84 .

Notes to Chapter i \ 18 1 II. Se e Algernon Sidney, Discourses Concerning Government, 2d ed. (London: John Darby, 1704), 13, 38, 62-63, 227-28 ; James Tyrrell, Patriarcha non Monarchal The Patriarch Unmonarch'd (London: Richar d Janeway, 1681), chap. 1; John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, ed . Peter Laslett (Cambridge : Cambridge Universit y Press, 1988), book 1, paras. 29, 47, 61; book 2, esp. paras. 82-83; see also Melissa Butler, "Early Liberal Roots of Feminism: John Lock e and th e Attack o n Patriarchy, " American Political Science Review 72 (Marc h 1978) : 135-50; Mary Lyndo n Shanley , "Marriag e Con tract an d Socia l Contrac t i n Seventeenth-Centur y Englis h Politica l Thought," Western Political Quarterly ^z, 1 (Marc h 1979): 79-91. 12. Mar y Astell, "Reflection s Upo n Marriage, " i n The First English Feminist: Reflections upon Marriage and Other Writings by Mary Astell, ed. Bridget Hill (Ne w York: St. Martin' s Press , 1986) , 75-76 ; Lad y Mar y Chudleigh , The Ladies Defence, or, the Bride-Woman's Counselor Answer'd (London: John Deeve , 1701), 3; Stone, Family, Sex, and Marriage, 655—56. 13. Jame s Harrington , The Commonwealth of Oceana (London: J. Streater , 1656), 208—9; John Locke, Some Thoughts Concerning Education, in The Educational Writings of John Locke, ed . James Axtell (Cambridge : Cambridg e Universit y Press , 1968), 145, 213; se e als o Natha n Tarcov , Locke's Education for Liberty (Chicago : Universit y o f Chicago Press, 1984), 98. 14. Schochet , Authoritarian Family, 72 ; James Otis, Jr., "The Rights of the British Colonies Asserte d an d Proved " (1764) , i n Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750—1776, ed . Bernar d Bailyn , 2 vols. (Cambridge : Harvar d Universit y Press , 1965), 1:420; Thomas Paine, "An Occasional Letter on the Female Sex" (1775), in Against the Tide: Pro-Feminist Men in the United States, 1776-ippo: A Documentary History, ed. Michael S . Kimme l an d Thomas F . Mosmiller (Boston : Beaco n Press , 1992), 63-66; Abigail Adams to John Adams, March 31,1776, in Familiar Letters of John Adams and His Wife Abigail Adams during the Revolution, ed. Charle s Franci s Adams (Freeport , N.Y.: Books for Librarie s Press, 1970), 148-50. 15. Kennet h Lockridge, On the Sources of Patriarchal Rage: The Commonplace Books ofWilliam Byrdand Thomas Jefferson and the Gendering of Power in the Eighteenth Century (Ne w York : Ne w Yor k Universit y Press , 1992) , 84 , 88 , 108-9 ; s e e a ls° Smith Rosenberg, i n Kerbe r e t al. , "Forum : Beyon d Roles , Beyon d Spheres, " 573 ; Norton, Liberty's Daughters, 125 , 225 . 16. Anonymous , "Vers e Written b y a Young Lady , o n Wome n Bor n t o b e Con troll'd" (1743) , in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:701-2 ; Annis Boudinot Stockton , "A Satire on Fashionable Pompoon s Worn b y the Ladies in the Year 1759" (1759), in Second to None: A Documentary History of American Women, ed. Ruth Barne s Moynihan, Cynthia Russett , an d Lauri e Crumpacker , 2 vols. (Lincoln : Universit y o f Nebrask a Press, 1993) , 1:150-51 ; Judit h Sargen t Murray , "Observation s o n Femal e Abilities " (1792-94) an d "Stor y of Margaretta," in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 38, 223, 233; see also Lewis, "Republican Wife," 693 , 707, 709, 711-12; Juster, Disorderly Women, 187 . 17. Rotundo , "Patriarch s an d Participants, " i n Kaufman , ed. , Beyond Patriarchy,

182 I Notes to Chapter i 67; Kenneth A. Lockridge, A New England Town: The First One Hundred Years (New York: Norton, 1970) , 102; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 99 ; Matthews, Rise of Public Woman, 33-34; Lewis, "Republican Wife," 696; Wood, Radicalism, 145-168; see also Rober t A . Gross , The Minutemen and Their World (New York : Hil l & Wang , 1976), 76-89. 18. Demos , Past, Present, and Personal, 49-52; Rotundo, American Manhood, 23 . 19. Lockridge , Sources of Patriarchal Rage, 68, 81-82,112-13; Nancy E Cott, in Kerber e t ah , "Forum : Beyon d Roles , Beyon d Spheres, " 568 ; Mar y H . Blewett , Men, Women, and Work: Class, Gender, and Protest in the New England Shoe Industry, 1780-1910 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988), 17; Grace Galloway, "Journa l of Grace Growde n Galloway, " i n Moynihan , Russett , an d Crumpacker , eds. , Second to None, 1:173. 20. R . W. K. Hinton, "Husbands , Fathers and Conquerors," Political Studies 15, 3 (October 1967): 294. 21. Michae l S. Kimmel, Manhood in America: A Cultural History (New York: Free Press, 1996), 16-18; Wood, Radicalism, par t 1 , esp. 32; Richard Bushman , The Refinement of America: Persons, Houses, Cities (New York: Random House , 1992), 207. 22. Bushman , Refinement, xix, 84, 207-8; John Perkins, "Theory of Agency: or, An Essay on th e Nature, Source , and Exten t o f Moral Freedom " (1771) , in American Political Writings during the Founding Era, 1760-1805, ed. Charles S. Hyneman and Don ald S. Lutz, 2 vols. (Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1983), 1:145; Timothy Dwight, quote d in Bushman, Refinement, 194—95. 23. G . J. Barker-Benfield, The Culture of Sensibility: Sex and Society in EighteenthCentury Britain (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), 117; Kimmel, Manhood in America, 21; Buel and Buel, Way of Duty,48; Royall Tyler, "The Contrast, A Comedy in Fiv e Acts" (1790) , in Lauter , ed. , Heath Anthology, 1:1111 ; Jay Fliegelman, Declaring Independence: Jefferson, Natural Language, and the Culture of Performance (Stanford: Stanfor d Universit y Press, 1993), 37. 24. Kimmel , Manhood in America, 16; Mary Ann Clawson , Constructing Brotherhood: Class, Gender, andFraternalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989), 14, 23, 52; Gary B. Nash, Race, Class, and Politics: Essays on American and Colonial Society (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1986), chap. 9, esp. 251 . 25. Tyler , "Th e Contrast " (1790) , in Lauter , ed. , Heath Anthology, 1:1113-14, 1117 , 1133-34,1141; Murray, "Observations o n Female Abilities," in Selected Writings, 39; see also Lewis , "Republica n Wife, " 689-721 ; Norton , Liberty's Daughters, 254-55; Ben jamin Rush, "A Plan for the Establishment of Public Schools and Diffusion o f Knowledge in Pennsylvania , t o which ar e Added, Thoughts upo n th e Mod e o f Education , Proper i n a Republic, Addressed t o th e Legislatur e an d Citizen s o f the State " (1786 ) and "Thought s Upo n Femal e Education, Accommodated t o the Present Stat e of Society, Manners, and Government in the United States of America" (1787), in Essays on Education in the Early Republic, ed. Frederick Rudolph (Cambridge : Harvard Univer sity Press, 1965), 2-23, 27-40.

Notes to Chapter i I 18 3 26. Lockridge , Sources of Patriarchal Rage, 112; Juster, Disorderly Women, chaps. 4-5; Carolin e Robbins , The Eighteenth-Century Commonwealthman: Studies in the Transmission, Development and Circumstances of English Liberal Thought from the Restoration of Charles II until the War with the Thirteen Colonies (Cambridge: Harvar d University Press, 1961), 16. Compare Gordo n S . Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787 (New York: Norton, 1969) ; Joyce Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order: The Republican Visions of the1790s (New York: New York University Press, 1984); and John P. Diggins, The Lost Soul of ^AmericanPolitics (New York: Basic Books, 1984). 27. Rotundo , American Manhood, 17-20 ; Kimmel , Manhood in America, 45 ; Bushman, Refinement, 402-3. 28. Georg e Mason t o Georg e Mason, Jr., January 8,1783, in The Papers of George Mason, 1779-1786, ed . Rober t A. Rutland , 3 vols. (Chape l Hill : Universit y o f Nort h Carolina Press , 1970) 2:762 ; Mary P. Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class: The Family in Oneida County, New York, 1790-186$ (Cambridge: Cambridge Universit y Press, 1981), chap. 1 ; Joan HofT , Law, Gender, and Injustice: A Legal History of U.S. Women (New York: Ne w Yor k Universit y Press , 1991) , chap . 1 ; Rut h H . Bloch , "Th e Gendere d Meanings o f Virtue i n Revolutionar y America, " Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 13 , 11 (1987): 56 ; Rotundo , American Manhood, 20-21; Clawson , Constructing Brotherhood, 72-73 . 29. Kimmel , Manhood in America, 21; Rotundo , American Manhood, 19-20; Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order, 10 4 and chap . 4; Louis Hartz, The Liberal Tradition in America (New York: Harcourt, Brac e and World, 1955), 111-12. 30. R . W. Connell , Masculinities (Berkeley an d Lo s Angeles: University o f Cali fornia Press , 1995), 198. 31. Se e Nash, Race, Class, and Politics, 248 . 32. Joa n R . Gundersen , "Independence , Citizenship , an d th e American Revolu tion," Signs: Journal of Women in Culture andSociety13,11 (1987) : 77; Stonington Association (1787) , quoted in Juster, Disorderly Women, 117; Judith Sargent Murray, "O n the Equality of the Sexes" (1790), in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:1011-16 . 33. Nanc y Hartsock , "Th e Barrack s Communit y i n Wester n Politica l Thought : Prolegomena t o a Feminist Critiqu e o f War and Politics, " in Women and Mens Wars, ed. Judith H. Stiehm (Oxford : Pergamon , 1983), 283-84; Hanna Fenichel Pitkin, Fortune Is a Woman: Gender and Politics in the Thought ofNiccolo Machiavelli (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press , 1984), 109,117; Carole Pateman, The Sexual Contract (Stanford, Calif : Stanford Universit y Press, 1988), chap. 1; idem, The Disorder ofWomen: Democracy, Feminism and Political Theory (Stanford: Stanford Uni versity Press, 1989), 4. 34. Smith-Rosenberg , i n Kerbe r e t al., "Forum: Beyon d Roles , Beyond Spheres, " 573; Linda Kerber, "'History Can Do It No Justice': Women and the Reinterpretatio n of th e American Revolution, " i n Women in the Age of the American Revolution, ed. Ronald Hoffman an d Peter Albert (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1989),

184 I Notes to Chapter 1 24-25, 30-31 ; Bloch, "Gendere d Meaning s of Virtue," 44-45, 56; Philip Greven , The Protestant Temperament: Patterns of Child-Rearing, Religious Experience, and Self in Early America (Ne w York : Knopf , 1977) , 351-52 ; Juster, Disorderly Women, 142-43; Gundersen, "Independence, " 75, 77; Christine Stansell , City of Women: Sex and Class in New York: 1;'89-1860 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987), 21; Judith Shklar , American Citizenship: The Quest for Inclusion (Cambridge: Harvard Universit y Press, 1991), 15-16; Hoff, Law, Gender, and Injustice, 4, 38-39,117, and chaps. 1-3; Joyce Appleby, Liberalism and Republicanism in the Historical Imagination (Cambridge : Har vard University Press, 1992), 29; Lewis, "Republican Wife," 689-721; see also Linda K. Kerber, Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolin a Press, 1980), 199-200, 229. 35. Rotundo , American Manhood, 17—20; Kimmel, Manhood in America, 7 , 14 ; David G . Pugh , Sons of Liberty: The Masculine Mind in Nineteenth-Century America (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1983), xvi-xvii; Michael Paul Rogin, Fathers and Children: Andrew Jackson and the Subjugation of the American Indian (New York: Random House , 1975) , 30: Joe L. Dubbert, A Mans Place: Masculinity in Transition (Englewood Cliffs , N.J. : Prentice-Hall, 1979) , 11,13,17; Michael S . Kimmel, "Th e Con temporary 'Crisis ' o f Masculinity i n Historica l Perspective, " i n The Making of Masculinities: The New Mens Studies, ed . Harry S . Brod (Boston : Allen & Unwin , 1987), 140-42; Peter G. Filene, Him/Her/Self: Sex Roles in Modern America, 2d ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986), chap. 3. 36. Christin e Stansell , in Kerber et al., "Forum: Beyond Roles , Beyond Spheres," 569; Alexander Hamilton , Federalist No. 6, in Alexander Hamilton , James Madison , and John Jay, The Federalist Papers, ed . Clinto n Rossite r (Ne w York: New American Library, 1961) , 54-55; John Adams t o James Sullivan , Ma y 26 , 1776, in Free Government in the Making: Readings in American Political Thought, ed. Alpheu s Thoma s Mason an d Gordo n E . Baker , 4t h ed . (Ne w York : Oxfor d Universit y Press , 1985), 120-21; John Adams, " A Defence o f the Constitutions o f Government o f the Unite d States of America" (1787), in The Political Writings of John Adams, ed. George Peek (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1954) , 124,147; Anna G. Jonasdottir, Why Women Are Oppressed (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1994), 117-18. 37. Geneviev e Lloyd, The Man of Reason:"Male" and "Female" in Western Philosophy, 2d ed. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), viii, xviii, 103-4; Pateman, Disorder of Women, 4, 21. 38. Theophilu s Parsons , "Th e Esse x Result" (1778) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 1:497 . 39. Christin e D i Stefano , Configurations of Masculinity: A Feminist Perspective on Modern Political Theory (Ithaca: Cornel l Universit y Press , 1991) , 143 ; Lockridge , Sources of PatriarchalRage, 83-84 , 96, 98. 40. Kerber , Women of the Republic, 31 ; Samuel Williams, "Th e Natural an d Civi l History of Vermont" (1794) , in Hynema n an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:956; John Adams to Abigail Adams, June 3,1778, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 334;

Notes to Chapter i I 18 5 Mercy Otis Warren, History of the Rise, Progress and Termination of the American Revolution, interspersed with Biographical, Political and Moral Observations (1805) , ed . Lester H. Cohen , 2 vols. (Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1988), 1:212. 41. Georg e Washington t o Nathanae l Greene , Octobe r 6 , 1781 , in Affectionately Yours, George Washington: A Self Portrait in Letters of Friendship, ed. Thomas J. Flem ing (New York: Norton, 1967) , 155; Michael Grossberg , "Institutionalizin g Masculin ity: The La w as a Masculine Profession, " i n Meanings for Manhood: Constructions of Masculinity in Victorian America, ed. Mar k C . Carne s an d Clyd e Griffi n (Chicago : University o f Chicago Press , 1990), 135; Oxenbridge Thatcher, "Th e Sentiment s o f a British American" (1764) , in Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets, 1:496 ; Landon Carter , quote d i n Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 109 ; Paine, "Commo n Sense, " i n The Life and Major Writings, 19 , 25; idem, "American Crisis II," in Ibid., 62 ; idem, "American Cri sis III," in Ibid., 78-79; idem, "American Crisi s VII," in Ibid., 147,154; idem, "Amer ican Crisis XII," in Ibid., 227. 42. Shklar , American Citizenship, 2,15,17. 43. Jame s Dana , "Th e Africa n Slav e Trade" (1791) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1052-54; David Ramsay , The History of the American Revolution (1789), 2 vols. (Indianapolis: Libert y Press , 1990) , 1:29-30 ; Timothy Ford , "Th e Constitutionalist : Or, An Inquiry How Far It Is Expedient and Proper to Alter the Constitution of South Carolina" (1794), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:934; John Taylor, Arator: Being a Series of Agricultural Essays, Practical and Political in Sixty-Four Numbers (1803), ed. M. E. Bradford (Indianapolis : Liberty Press 1977), 124; J. Hecto r St. John d e Crevecoeur, Letters from an American Farmer (New York: Penguin Books , 1981), 68-69 , 168-71 ; se e als o Doree n Alvare z Saar , "Th e Heritag e o f Ethnicit y i n Crevecouer's Letters from an American Farmer," i n A Mixed Race: Ethnicity in Early America, ed. Frank Shuffelton (Ne w York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1993), 245, 251-53. 44. Noa h Webster , "Th e Revolutio n i n France " (1794) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1269-70; Davi d Dagget t an d Elbridg e Gerry , quote d i n Yazawa , From Colonies to Commonwealth, 108-9 . 45. Noa h Webster , "A n Oratio n o n th e Anniversary o f th e Declaratio n o f Inde pendence" (1802) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1234; Benjamin Franklin , "O n Constancy " (1734) , in Lemay , ed. , Writings, 225-26 ; idem , "On Drunkenness " (1733) , in Ibid., 213-14; Foster, The Coquette (1797), in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:1150-68; Hamilton, FederalistNo. 6,54, 56-57; John Adams to Abigail Adams, April 14,1776, in Mason and Baker, eds., Free Government, 119-20; see also Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 32 , 38,130. 46. Lockridge , Sources of Patriarchal Rage, 81-82; Joel Barlow, "The Hasty Pudding" (1793), in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:1092; Nancy Hartsock, Money, Sex, and Power: Toward a Feminist Historical Materialism (New York: Longman, 1983), 196-97; Pateman, Sexual Contract, 102 ; idem, Disorder of Women, 38 ; idem, "Introduction : The Theoretical Subversiveness of Feminism," in Feminist Challenges: Social and Political Theory, ed. Carole Pateman and Elizabeth Gross (Boston: Northeastern Universit y Press, 1986), 7.

186 I Notes to Chapter i 47. Jonatha n Mayhew , "Th e Snar e Broken" (1766) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 241, 249; Thomas Jefferson, "Secon d Inaugural Address" (1805), in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 320-21 ; Fisher Ames, "The Danger s o f American Lib erty" (1805), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1318-19 . 48. Benjami n Franklin , "Celi a Single" (1732), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 189-90; see also Mar k E . Kann , On the Man Question: Gender and Civic Virtue in America (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), esp. the conclusion title d "Fortun e Is a Man," 295-316. 49. Thoma s Jefferson t o Francois de Barbe-Marbois, Decembe r 5,1783 , in Jefferson Himself: The Personal Narrative of a Many-Sided American, ed . Bernar d May o (Charlottesville: Universit y Pres s o f Virginia, 1970) , 43 ; Thomas Jefferso n t o Mari a Cosway, October 12,1786 , in Ibid., 129-40. 50. Wood , Radicalism, 27-2$, 46. 51. Bernar d Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of theAmerican Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967), 305. 52. Otis , "Rights of the British Colonies" (1764), in Bailyn, Pamphlets, 1:436, 444, 44753. Ramsay , History, 1:172, 2:637; John Adams t o Abigail Adams, July 7, 1774 , in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 20; George Washington, "General Orders, July 10,1776," in A Biography in His Own Words, ed . Ralph K . Andrist (Ne w York: Harper & Row, i97*)> 153. 54. Joh n Adams to Abigail Adams, April 14,1776, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 153-55; John Adams to John Taylor (1814) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 206 . 55. Se e Terence Bal l and J. G . A . Pocock , "Introduction, " i n Conceptual Change and the Constitution, ed. Terence Bal l an d J. G . A. Pococ k (Lawrence : University o f Kansas Press, 1988), 1; Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order, 16-23; Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 28—35 . 56. Juster , Disorderly Women, 141-42 57. Lockridge , Sources of PatriarchalRage, 96-98 . 58. Matthews, Rise of Public Woman, 4; see also Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 130.

59. Pateman , Sexual Contract, 102-3 ; Noah Webster, "O n th e Education o f Youth in America" (1790) , in Rudolph, ed. , Essays on Education, 69 . 60. Antoni o Gramsci, "State and Civil Society," in Selections from the Prison Notebooks, ed. Quintin Hoar e and Geoffrey Nowel l Smith (Ne w York: International Pub lishers, 1971), 258-59, 263; Raymond Williams, Marxism and Literature (Oxford: Oxford Universit y Press, 1977), 108-14. 61. R . W. Connell, Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics (Stanford: Stanfor d Universit y Press, 1987), no, 183 ; idem, Masculinities, 77-80 ; Kimmel , Manhood in America, 7 ; Davi d Leverenz , Manhood and the American Renaissance (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989), 72-73; Mark Gerzon, A Choice of Heroes: The Changing Face of American Manhood (Boston: Houghton Mifflin , 1982) , 43.

Notes to Chapter 2 I 18 7

NOTES T O CHAPTE R 2

i. Benjami n Franklin , "Th e Autobiography, " i n The Autobiography and Other Writings, ed . L . Jesse Lemisc h (Ne w York: Ne w American Library , 1961) , 18; Paine, "Common Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings, 40; John Adams, "Dissertation o n the Canon an d Feuda l Law" (1765) , in Peek , ed., Political Writings, 8 , 16; idem, "De fence of the Constitutions" (1787), in Ibid., 114; Thomas Jefferson, "Declaratio n of Independence" (1776) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 236 , 240. 2. Paine , "Common Sense,"i n The Life and Major Writings, 41 ; Abigail Adams t o John Adams, October 20,1777 , in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 317. 3. Patric k Henry , "Speeche s of Patrick Henry, June 5 , 1788," in The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates, ed . Ralph Ketcha m (Ne w York: New American Library , 1986) , 200; James Otis , Jr., quote d i n Warren, History, 1:29; Benjamin Franklin , "The Trial and Reprieve of Prouse and Mitchel" (1729), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 140; George Washington, "Farewel l Orders to the Armies of the Unite d States, November 2,1783," in Allen, ed., George Washington, 268-69; Perkins, "Theory of Agency " (1771) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:146 ; James Kent, "A n Introductory Lectur e to a Course of Law Lectures" (1794), in Ibid. , 2:944, 949; James Madison, FederalistNo. 40, 253-54; Samuel Cooper, " A Sermon o n the Day of the Commencement o f the Constitution" (1780) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 645 ; Joel Barlow, "A Letter to the National Convention o f France on the Defects in the Constitution o f 1791" (1792), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:834 . 4. Georg e Washington t o John Hancock , Septembe r 16, 1776, in Andrist, ed. , A Biography, 159; "The Liberty Song" (1768), in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:918; Anna Young Smith, "An Elegy to the Memory of our American Volunteers, who Fell in Engagement Betwee n th e Massachusetts-Bay Militia , an d th e Britis h Troops" (1775) , in Ibid., 1:694 ; J oe l Barlow , "Th e Prospec t o f Peace " (1778) , i n Ibid. , 1:1084 ; Milca h Martha Moore, "The Female Patriots, Address'd to the Daughters of Liberty in America" (1768), in Ibid., 1:683; Greven, Protestant Temperament, 352. 5. Gerd a Lerner , The Creation of Patriarchy (New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1986), 201, also 44-45,178; Jonasdottir, Why Women Are Oppressed, 30; Richard Ames, The Folly of Love; or, an Essay upon Satyr against Woman (1691), reprinted in Satires on Women, ed. Felicit y Nussbaum , Augusta n Reprin t Society , no . 18 0 (Lo s Angeles : William Andrew s Clar k Memoria l Library , 1976) , 71 ; Pateman , Sexual Contract, 88-89; Lockridge, Sources of PatriarchalRage, 14,19 , 25, 81-83. 6. Joh n Leland, "The Connecticut Dissenters' Strong Box: No. 1" (1802), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1190; Adams, "Defence o f the Con stitutions" (1787) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 46. 7. Washingto n t o Lafayette , Jul y 25 , 1785, in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 304 ; grandfather quote d i n Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 46. 8. Mayhew , "Th e Snar e Broken " (1766) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 240 ,

188 I Notes to Chapter 2 247; Thomas Fitch , "Reason s Wh y th e Britis h Colonie s i n Americ a shoul d no t b e Charged with Internal Taxes" (1764), in Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets, 1:399; Adams, "Dissertation o n the Canon" (1765) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 12-13 . 9. Sheldo n Wolin, The Presence of the Past: Essays on the State and the Constitution (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989), 137,140; Warren, History, 1:59-61. 10. Sila s Downer, "Discours e a t the Dedicatio n o f the Tree of Liberty" (1768) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:107 . 11. Danie l Shute, "An Election Sermon" (1768), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:135 ; John Allen, "A n Oration Upo n th e Beautie s o f Liberty" (1773), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 310, 322-23; Moses Mather, "Americas Appeal to the Impartial World" (1775) , in Ibid., 445. 12. Thoma s Jefferson, "Th e Declaration on the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms" (July 6,177s), in Mayo, ed., Jefferson Himself, 55; Cooper, "A Sermon" (1780), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 656; see also "Cato I" (1787), in The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist andAntifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters during the Struggle over Ratification, ed. Bernar d Bailyn , 2 vols. (Ne w York: Librar y o f America, 1993) , 1:32 ; Simeon Howard , " A Sermon Preache d t o the Ancient an d Honorabl e Artillery Com pany in Boston" (1773), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:202. 13. Douglas s Adair, "Fam e and the Founding Fathers," in Fame and the Founding Fathers: Essays by Douglass Adair, ed . Trevor Colbour n (Ne w York: Norton, 1974) , 7; Griswold, "Overcomin g Evil" (1801), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1551 . 14. Franklin , "Repl y t o a Piec e o f Advice" (1735) , i n Lemay , ed. , Writings, 249 ; idem, "Cause s o f American Discontent s Befor e 1768 " (1768) , i n Ibid. , 611 ; Murray, "Observations o n Female Abilities," in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 24 , 28. 15. Franklin , "Observation s Concernin g th e Increas e o f Mankind " (1751) , i n Lemay, ed., Writings, 368; Washington t o Lafayette, July 25,1785, in Allen, ed., George Washington, 304; Jefferson t o Jean Baptiste Say, February 1,1804, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 498. 16. Benjami n Franklin , "O n th e Tenure of the Manor of East Greenwich" (1766), in Lemay , ed. , Writings, 572; Thomas Jefferson , " A Summary View o f th e Right s o f British America" (1774) , in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 4-5 ; George Duffield, " A Sermon Preache d on a Day of Thanksgiving" (1783) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 782-83. 17. Georg e Washington t o Marqui s d e Chastellux , Apri l 25 , 1788, in Allen , ed. , George Washington, 394 ; Taylor, Arator, 96-97, 315 ; see als o Gross , Minutemen, 80 ; Wood, Radicalism, 178 . 18. Thoma s Jefferson, "Note s on the State of Virginia" (1781), in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 217; idem, "Second Inaugural Address" (1805), in Ibid., 318; Taylor, Arator, 67 . 19. Garr y Wills, Cincinnatus: George Washington and the Enlightenment (Garde n City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984) , 23; see also Warren, History, 1:34; Adams, "Defenc e o f the Constitutions" (1787) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 135-36.

Notes to Chapter 2 I 18 9 20. Anonymous , " A Letter to the People of Pennsylvania; Occasione d b y the Assembly's Passing that Important Act for Constituting the Judges of the Supreme Court and Common-Plea s Durin g Goo d Behavior " (1760) , i n Bailyn , ed. , Pamphlets, 1:270-71.

21. Danie l Dulany , "Consideration s o n th e Propriety o f Imposing Taxe s i n the British Colonies" (1765), in Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets, 1:614. 22. Jame s Madiso n an d James Wilson , "Citizenshi p fo r Immigrants " (1787) , in Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 157-58; Shklar, American Citizenship, 3. 23. Kerber , Women of the Republic, chap. 4; Gross, Minutemen, 102 . 24. Michae l Lienesch, New Order of the Ages: Time, the Constitution, and the Making of Modern American Political Thought (Princeton : Princeto n Universit y Press , 1988), 82; Caleb Lownes, "An Account of the Alteration and Present State of the Penal Laws of Pennsylvania" (1793) , in Reform of Criminal Law in Pennsylvania: Selected Inquiries, 1787-1819 (New York: Arno Press Reprint, 1972) , 93. 25. Se e Pateman, Sexual Contract, 77-78. 26. Samue l Adams, quoted i n A. J. Langguth, Patriots: The Men Who Started the American Revolution (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988), 98; Mather, "Americas Appeal" (1775) , in Sandoz, ed. , Political Sermons, 483 ; Oxenbridge Thatcher quote d in Langguth, Patriots, 71; Sherwood, "Scriptural Instructions" (1774), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 378 ; Ramsay, History, 1:183 . 27. Jame s Otis, Jr., " A Vindication o f the British Colonies " (1765), in Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets, 1:565 ; John Dickinson , "Letter s from a Farmer in Pennsylvania" (1767) , in Mason an d Baker, eds., Free Government, 98; Jefferson, "Summar y View" (1774) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 21 . 28. Georg e Washington t o Brian Fairfax , August 24,1774 , in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 48 ; Witherspoon, "Dominio n o f Providence" (1776) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 537; Joseph Warren, quoted in Langguth, Patriots, 252; Paine, "Common Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings, 22-23 . 29. Paine , "America n Crisi s II, " in The Life and Major Writings, 162; Abigail Adams to John Adams, July 13,1776, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 210; Thomas Jefferson, "Roug h Draf t o f the Declaration o f Independence," in Carl Becker , The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of PoliticalIdeas (New York: Random House, 1970), 148-49; George Washington, "Genera l Orders , July 2, 1776," in Allen, ed., George Washington, 71; Georg e Washington t o John Augustine Washington, May 31,1776, in Ibid., 69; George Washington to John Banister, April 21,1778, in Ibid., 101. 30. Wilso n Care y McWilliams , The Idea of Fraternity in America (Berkele y and Los Angeles: University of California Press , 1973), 92—93; Ramsay, History, 1:112; Jefferson, "Note s on the State of Virginia" (1781) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 213 . 31. Ramsay , History, 1:221-22; David Tappan, " A Sermon fo r the Day of General Election" (1792) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1109 . 32. Jame s Winthrop, "Agripp a IX " (1787) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitu-

190 I Notes to Chapter 2 tion, 1:628 ; Crevecoeur, Letters from an American Farmer, 77—78; A Constan t Cus tomer, "Lette r from a Gentleman i n the Country to His Friend" (1773) , in Hynema n and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:183; anonymous, "Rudiments of Law and Government Deduce d from th e Law of Nature" (1783) , in Ibid., 1:584. 33. Jame s Madison, FederalistNo. 14,103-4; "Cato V," in Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 318-19 ; James Madison , "Debate s i n th e Hous e o f Representatives " (1789), i n Creating the Bill of Rights: The Documentary Record from the First Federal Congress, ed. Helen E. Veit, Kenneth R . Bowling, and Charlene Bangs Bickford (Bal timore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), 78; Peres Fobes, "An Election Sermon " (1795), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1010-11 . 34. Webster , "Revolutio n i n France " (1794) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1259-60; Thomas Jefferson t o Anne Willing Bingham , Ma y 11 , 1788, in Moynihan , Russett, and Crumpacker, eds. , Second to None, 1:184-85. 35. Georg e Washington t o Davi d Humphreys , Decembe r 26 , 1786, in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 351 ; Thomas Jefferson t o Ezr a Stiles, Decembe r 24 , 1786, in The Political Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed . Edwar d Dumbaul d (Indianapolis : Bobbs Merrill, 1955), 69. 36. Thoma s Jefferso n t o Willia m Short , January 3 , 1793, in Mayo , ed. , Jefferson Himself, 185. 37. Crevecouer , Letters from an American Farmer, 70, 90 ; Georg e Washington , "General Orders , March 1 , 1778," in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 96 ; idem, "Gen eral Orders, April 18,1783," in Ibid., 237. 38. Madison , FederalistNo. 40, 248-49; Hamilton, FederalistNo. 71, 432; see also Adair, "Fame and the Founding Fathers," 12. 39. Georg e Washington, "Speec h to the Officers o f the Army, March 15,1783," in Allen, ed., George Washington, 217-22 . 40. Joh n Adam s t o Thoma s Jefferson , Ma y 11 , 1794, i n Joh n Adams , Abigai l Adams, an d Thomas Jefferson, The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams, ed. Leste r J. Cappon , 2 vols. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolin a Press, 1959), 1:255; Alexander Hamilton t o John Jay, May, 7, 1800 , in A Biography in His Own Words, ed . Mary-J o Klin e (New York: Harpe r & Row , 1973) , 377 ; Gar y J. Schmitt , "Jefferso n an d Executiv e Power: Revisionism an d the 'Revolution o f 1800,'" in American Models of Revolutionary Leadership: George Washington and Other Founders, ed . Danie l J. Elaza r an d Elli s Katz (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992), 167. 41. Willia m Emerson , "A n Oratio n i n Commemoratio n o f th e Anniversar y o f American Independence" (1802) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1568 . 42. Se e Reid Mitchell, The Vacant Chair: The Northern Soldier Leaves Home (New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1993), 116; Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, 185-86. 43. Joh n Tucker, "An Election Sermon" (1771), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:173 . 44. Mather , "America' s Appeal" (1775), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 488.

Notes to Chapter 3 I 19 1 45. Samue l Miller, " A Sermon o n th e Anniversary of the Independence o f America, July 4,1793," in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1153; John Adams to Abigail Adams, June 16 , 1776, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 185 ; Warren, History, 2:505, 600; Zabdiel Adams, "An Election Sermon " (1782) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 1:563; George Washington t o George William Fairfax , July 10,1783, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 184; George Washington to Benjamin Harrison , January 18,1784, in Andrist, ed. , A Biography, 252 ; "An Old Stat e Soldier" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:34 . 46. Jeremia h Hill to George Thatcher, February 26,1788, in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:241; Simeon Baldwin , "Oratio n a t New Haven, Connecticut , July 4, 1788, " i n Ibid. , 2:524 ; Merc y Oti s Warren , "Observation s o n th e Constitution " (1788), in Ibid., 2:293, 301-2. 47. Murray , "Sketch of the Present Situation" (1794) , in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 53-54; Bisho p Jame s Madison , "Manifestation s o f th e Beneficenc e o f Divin e Providence Towards America " (1795) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1314 ; Fobes, "Election Sermon " (1795) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1004; Jonathan Maxey , "A n Oration " (1799) , i n Ibid. , 2:1044 ; Webster, "Oration " (1802), in Ibid., 2:1221 ; Ames, "Dangers of American Liberty " (1805) , in Ibid., 2:1301, 1304. 48. Hanna h Arendt , The Human Condition (Chicago : Universit y o f Chicag o Press, 1958), 8-9; Adair, "Fam e and th e Foundin g Fathers, " 21; Samuel McClintock , "A Sermon on Occasion of the Commencement of the New Hampshire Constitution " (1784), in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 802 ; Hartsock, Money, Sex, and Power, 197 ; Murray, "Equality of the Sexes" (1790), in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:1012-13 . 49. Warren , History, 1:80. 50. Se e Klaus Theweleit, Male Fantasies, trans. Stephen Conway, Erica Carter, and Chris Turner, 2 vols. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press , 1987,1989), 2:185. 51. Se e Nancy F. Cott, "Passionlessness: An Interpretation o f Victorian Sexual Ideology, 1790-1850," in Cott and Pleck, eds., Heritage of HerOwn, 162-81. NOTES T O CHAPTE R 3

1. Jame s Winthrop, "Agripp a XVIII" (1788) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:157. 2. Astell , "Reflection s Upo n Marriage, " i n The First English Feminist, 94 ; Aphra Behn, "To Alexis in Answer to his Poem against Fruition," in Kissing the Rod, ed. Germain Greer, Susan Hastings, Jeslyn Medoff, an d Melinda Sansone (Ne w York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux , 1988) , 259; anonymous, A Farther Essay Relating to the Female Sex (London: A. Roper & E. Wilkinson, 1696) , 105-15; Barker-Benfield, Culture of Sensibility, chap. 2; and Robert Gould, Love given o're or, a Satire against the Pride, Lust, and Lnconstance, &tc. of Woman (London: Andrew Green, 1682), in Nussbaum, ed., Satires on Women, 12 .

192 I Notes to Chapter 3 3. Astell , "Reflections," i n The First English Feminist, 75 ; anonymous, An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex (London: A. Roper & E. Wilkinson, 1696) , 127-29; anonymous, Mundus Foppensis: or, the Fop Display'd(London: John Harris, 1691), in Mundus Foppensis (1691) and The Levellers (1703X ed. Michael S. Kimmel, Augustan Reprint Society, no. 248 (Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1988), 11-13. 4. Anonymous , The Levellers: A Dialogue between two young Ladies, concerning Matrimony, Proposing an Act for Enforcing Marriage, for the Equality of Matches, and Taxing Single Persons, With the Danger ofCelebacy to a Nation (1703) , in Kimmel, ed. , Mundus Foppensis and the Levellers, 422—23. 5. Locke , Some Thoughts Concerning Education-, anonymous, The Levellers, in Kimmel, ed., Mundus Foppensis and the Levellers, 419, 420—22. 6. Thir d Ear l o f Shaftesbury , quote d i n Barker-Benfield , Culture of Sensibility, 113-15.

7. Barker-Benfield , Culture of Sensibility, 46 ; David Hume , A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. L. A. Selby-Bigge (Oxford : Oxfor d Universit y Press, 1968), book 3, pt. 2, sec. 12, 570-73. 8. Joh n Trenchard, An Argument Shewing That a Standing Army Ls Lnconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy (London, 1697) , iii. 9. Willia m Prynne, quoted in Lois G. Schwoerer, "No Standing Armies!" The AntiArmy Ideology of Seventeenth-Century England (Baltimore: Johns Hopkin s Universit y Press, 1974) , 62 ; Trenchard, Argument, 28—29 ; Toland, Militia Reformd, 76; Andrew Fletcher o f Saltoun, A Discourse of Government with relation to Militias (Edinburgh , 1698), 33-34; see also J. R. Western, The English Militia in the Eighteenth Century (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965), 269. 10. Anonymous , Essay in Defence of the Female Sex, 92-93,115; Toland, Militia Reformd, 7-8,17 ; se e also Barker-Benfield, Culture of Sensibility, 47, 80. 11. Toland , Militia Reformd, 83-84 . 12. Si r Georg e Ferrars , quote d i n Barker-Benfield , Culture of Sensibility, 49; Si r Edwin Sandys quoted in Mary Ryan, Womanhood in America: From Colonial Times to the Present, 3 d ed . (Ne w York : Frankli n Watts , 1983) , 32 ; anonymou s missionar y quoted i n Barker-Benfield , Culture of Sensibility, 49; see also Mimi Abramovitz, Regulating the Lives of Women: Social Welfare Policy from Colonial Times to the Present (Boston: South End Press , 1988), 46, 53-54. 13. Benjami n Franklin , "Th e Speec h of Polly Baker" (1747) , in Lemay , ed., Writings, 305—8 ; Gross, Minutemen, 100,181-82 . 14. Joh n Adams to Abigail Adams, July 29,1776, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 205-6; Abigail Adams t o John Adams, August 14 , 1776, in Ibid. , 214 ; Abigail Adams to John Adams, July 31,1777, in Ibid., 286-87; John Adams to Abigail Adams, August 11,1777, in Ibid., 290. 15. Tyler , "The Contrast" (1790) , in Lauter, The Heath Anthology, esp . m m, 1129 , 1131, 1133-34; Joel Barlow , "The Prospec t o f Peace" (1778), in Ibid. , 1:1087-88 ; Judith

Notes to Chapter 3 I 19 3 Sargent Murray , "Desultor y Thoughts upo n th e Utilit y o f Encouraging a Degree o f Self-Complacency, Especiall y in Female Bosoms" (1784), in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 46-47. 16. Georg e Washington t o Robi n Washingto n (1748) , in Fleming , ed. , Affectionately Yours, 15; George Washington t o Benedict Calvert (1773) , in Ibid., 42—43; George Washington to Bushrod Washington, January 15,1783, in Ibid., 165-66; George Washington to George Steptoe Washington, March 23,1789, in Ibid., 218-21; George Washington to David Stuart, January 22,1789, in Ibid., 264; George Washington to George Washington Park e Custis , Jun e 13 , 1798, i n Ibid. , 269 ; James Madiso n t o Willia m Bradford, Novembe r 9,1772 , i n A Biography in His Own Words, ed . Merrill D. Peter son (Ne w York: Harper & Row, 1974), 23-24; John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Oc tober 9,1787, in Cappon, ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:203 . 17. Anonymous , "Untitled " (1763) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 1:33-37; Samuel Wales, "The Dangers of Our National Prosperity: and the Way to Avoid Them" (1785) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 849 ; Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 37; see also Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Octobe r 7,1785, in Cappon, ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:80 . 18. Benjami n Frankli n t o Jane Mecom (Jun e 1748) , in Lemay , ed., Writings, 437 ; Benjamin Franklin , " A Letter fro m Fathe r Abraha m t o Hi s Belove d Son " (1758) , in Ibid., 517 ; Benjamin Frankli n t o John Alleyne, August 9,1768 , in Ibid., 836-37 ; Benjamin Franklin , "Poo r Richard s Almanack" (1733-1757) , in Ibid. , 1188 , 1233, 1283; Jeremiah Atwater, " A Sermon" (1801) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1183 ; anonymous, "Untitled " (1763) , in Ibid., 1:35-36. 19. Benjami n Rush , quoted i n Fliegelman , Declaring Independence, 138 ; Franklin, "Autobiography," 81 , 193; idem, "Ol d Mistresse s Apologue " (1745) , i n Lemay , ed. , Writings, 302. 20. Thoma s Jefferso n t o Joh n Adams , Octobe r 28 , 1813 , in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 533—34 ; Thomas Jefferson t o Thomas Jefferson Randolph , November 24,1808, in Ibid., 511 , 514; Thomas Jefferson t o John Barrister , October 15, 1785, in Ibid., 393-94; Thomas Jefferson t o Charles Bellini, Sept 30,1785, in Mayo, ed., Jefferson Himself, 112; Thomas Jefferson t o Abigail Adams, August 30,1787, in Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:193; Bernard Bailyn, Faces of the Revolution: Personalities and Themes in the Struggle for American Independence (Ne w York: Rando m House , 1992), 28; Washington t o Davi d Stuart , January 22 , 1798, in Fleming , ed. , Affectionately Yours, 264 . 21. Paine , "Common Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings, 9 ; Jefferson t o John Barrister, Octobe r 15 , 1785, in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 393—94 ; Charles Carroll, quoted i n Sall y D. Mason, "Mama , Rachel , and Molly : Three Gen erations o f Carrol l Women," i n Hoffma n an d Albert, eds. , Women in the Age of the American Revolution, 245; Adams to John Taylor (1814), in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 206; Webster, "Educatio n o f Youth in America" (1790) , in Rudolph, Essays on Education, 69.

194 I Notes to Chapter 3 22. Jaco b Rush, "The Nature and Importance of an Oath—the Charg e to a Jury" (1796), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1020-21 ; Alexander Hamilton, Observations on Certain Documents . . . in which the Charge of Speculation against Alexander Hamilton . . . is Fully Refuted (1797), i n Kline , ed. , A Biography, 355-56; Tunis Wortman, "A Solemn Address to Christians and Patriots" (1800), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1499 ; Bloch, "Gendered Meaning s of Virtue," 52. 23. Danie l Williams , "Th e Gratificatio n o f That Corrup t an d Lawles s Passion : Character Types and Themes in Early New England Rap e Narratives," in ShufFelton , ed., Mixed Race, 196 ; Stephanie Coontz , The Social Origins of Private Life: A History of American Families 1600-1900 (London: Verso, 1988), 83,126-27; Abramovitz, Regulating the Lives of Women, 53—54, 94, 96; Samuel Walker, Popular Justice: A History of American Criminal Justice(NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1980), 16; Kermit Hall, The Magic Mirror: Law in American History (New York : Oxfor d Universit y Press , 1989), 33; see also Mary Beth Norton, Founding Mothers and Fathers: Gendered Power and the Forming of American Society (New York: Knopf, 1996), prologue. 24. Norton , Libertys Daughters, 43; Judith Sargen t Murray, The Gleaner (Schenectady, N.Y.: Union College Press, 1992), 309-12; Benjamin Rush , My Dearest Julia: The Love Letters of Dr. Benjamin Rush (New York: Neale Watson Academic Publications , 1979), 3, 5-6, 20-21 , 28 , 36; see also Carl Degler , At Odds: Women and the Family in America from the Revolution to the Present (Oxford: Oxfor d Universit y Press , 1980), 5-925. Nathanae l Emmons , " A Discourse Delivere d o n th e National Fast " (1799), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1034-38 . 26. Hall , Magic Mirror, 33; Marybeth Hamilto n Arnold, "The Life of a Citizen in the Hand s o f a Woman: Sexua l Assault i n Ne w York City, 179 0 to 1820, " in Passion and Power: Sexuality in History, ed. Kathy Peiss and Christina Simmons (Philadelphia : Temple University Press, 1989), 41-42, 47; Stansell, City of Women, 23-27 . 27. Arnold , "Life of a Citizen," in Peiss and Simmons, eds., Passion and Power, 35; Josiah Quincy, quoted in Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 75; John Adams to Abigail Adams, July 5,1774, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 13 ; Ramsay, History, 1:304—5; William Bradford, An Enquiry How Far the Punishment of Deathis Necessary in Pennsylvania, i n Reform of Criminal Law, 29; see also Stansell, City of Women, 25 ; Walker, Popular Justice, 13-14 ; Buel and Buel, Way of Duty,n$. 28. Bradford , Enquiry, 29-30; Barlow, "Letter to the National Convention" (1792), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:834 ; s ee ^ so Walker , Popular Justice,33 , 48. 29. Bradford , Enquiry, 29—30, 63; see also Pauline Schloesser, "Republica n Moth erhood, Modern Patriarchy, and the Question of Woman Citizenshi p in Post-Revolutionary America" (pape r presente d a t th e Annual Meetin g o f the American Politica l Science Association , Washington , D.C. , Augus t 29-Septembe r 1 , 1991) , 9 ; Walker , Popular Justice, 16 . 30. "Davi s vs. Maryland, 1810," in Gay American History: Lesbians and Gay Men in

Notes to Chapter 3 I 19 5 the U.S.A., ed. Jonathan Kat z (Ne w York: Harper & Row , 1976), 26 and pt . 1 ; John Winthrop, quote d i n John D'Emili o an d Estell e Freedman, Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America (New York: Harper & Row , 1988), 30; Jonathan Edwards , Jr., "Th e Necessit y of the Belie f in Christianity " (1794) , in Sandoz , ed., Political Sermons, 1201. 31. Bradford , Enquiry, 20-21. 32. Hall , Magic Mirror, 29-30; Gross, Minutemen, 90 . 33. Madison , "Note s from th e Constitutional Convention, " i n Mason an d Baker , eds., Free Government, 194; Franklin , "Tria l an d Repriev e o f Pr o use an d Mitchel " (1729), in Lemay , ed. , Writings, 139 ; idem, " A Mock Petitio n t o th e Hous e o f Com mons" (1766) , in Ibid. , 583 ; idem, " A Conversation o n Slavery " (1770) , in Ibid. , 650 ; Raymond A. Mohl, "Poverty, Pauperism, and Social Order in the Preindustrial American City , 1780—1840, " in Law and Order in American History, ed . Joseph M . Hawe s (Port Washington , N.Y : Kennika t Press , 1979) , 31-32 ; se e als o Juster , Disorderly Women, 25 ; Walker, Popular Justice,15 ; Stansell, City of Women, 5—6 . 34. Crevecoeur , Letters from an American Farmer, 72 , 78—79; George Washington to Jame s Duane , Septembe r 7 , 1783 , i n Allen , ed. , George Washington, 260-63; Franklin, "Autobiography, " 132-33 ; Thomas Jefferso n t o Brothe r Handsom e Lake , November 3,1802, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 305-7. 35. Saar , "Heritage of Ethnicity," in Shuffelton, A Mixed Race, 251 ; Washington t o James Duane, Septembe r 7 , 1783, in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 266 ; Crevecoeur , Letters fromanAmerican Farmer, 79. 36. Ramsay , History, v.iy, Anonymous, "Rudiments of Law and Government" (1783), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:584 ; David Rice, "Slavery Inconsistent with Justice and Goo d Policy " (1792), in Ibid., 2:867-74; Theodore Dwight , "An Oration Spoken Before the Connecticut Society for the Promotion of Freedom and the Relief of Persons Unlawfully Holde n in Bondage" (1794), in Ibid., 2:891-92. 37. Dwight , "Oration " (1794) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:891-92 ; Jefferson, "Note s on the State of Virginia" (1781) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson,214—15; Rice, "Slavery Inconsistent with Justice" (1792), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:868; Taylor, Arator, 122-24. 38. Witherspoon , "Dominio n o f Providence" (1776), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 537; Gross, Minutemen, 94 , 96; Dana, "Africa n Slav e Trade" (1791) , in Sandoz , ed., Political Sermons, 1049; Wortman, "Solem n Address " (1800) , i n Ibid. , 1508—9 ; anonymous, "Rudiment s o f La w an d Government " (1783) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political'Writings, 1:584; Rice, "Slavery Inconsistent with Justice" (1792), in Ibid., 2:874; Taylor, Arator, 178. 39. Jefferson , "Note s on the State of Virginia" (1781), in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 94-95,187-89,192-93 ; Frank Shuffelton, "Thoma s Jefferson: Race , Culture, an d th e Failure of the Anthropological Method, " i n Shuffelton , ed. , Mixed Race, 268-70 . 40. Rice , "Slavery Inconsistent with Justice" (1792), in Hynemann an d Lutz, eds.,

196 I Notes to Chapter 3 American Political Writings, 2:861 ; Williams, "Gratification o f That Corrupt an d Lawless Passion," in Shuffelton, A Mixed Race, 198-200 ; Walker, Popular Justice, 33-34 . 41. Lev i Hart, "Libert y Describe d an d Recommended : i n a Sermon Preache d t o the Corporatio n o f Freeme n i n Farmington " (1775) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:314; Benjamin Rush , An Address to the Inhabitants of the British Settlements on the Slavery of Negroes in America (1773; Ne w York: Arno Pres s Reprint, 1969), 16; idem, Vindication of the Address to the Inhabitants of the British Settlements, on the Slavery of Negroes in America in Answer to a Pamphlet entitled, "Slavery not Forbidden in Scripture; Or a Defence of the West-Indian Planters fromtheAspersions thrown out against them by the Author of the Address' (1773), i n Ibid. , 41-43 ; Creve coeur, Letters fromanAmerican Farmer, 169-70 . 42. Jefferson , "Note s on the State of Virginia" (1781), in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 186 ; Taylor, Arator, 125,180-83 . 43. Se e Terence Ball , "The Myt h o f Adam an d th e American Identity, " i n Reappraising Political Theory (New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1994), chap. 12; Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, esp. chap. 6; Walker, Popular Justice, 24 . 44. Hall , Magic Mirror, 55; Langguth, Patriots, 119 ; Don Higginbotham , The War of American Independence: Military Attitudes, Policies, and Practices, IJ 63-1789 (Boston: Northeastern Universit y Press, 1983), 43; Warren, History, 1:244. 45. Allen , "Oration " (1773) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 313 ; Witherspoon, "Dominion o f Providence" (1776), in Ibid., 556 ; Franklin, "Conversatio n o n Slavery " (1770), in LeMay, ed. Writings, 652; idem, "The King's Own Regulars" (1775), in Ibid., 739-40; idem , "Informatio n t o Those Wh o Woul d Remov e t o America" (1784) , i n Ibid., 981 ; Howard, "Sermon " (1773) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, American Political Writings, 1:198; Warren, History, 1:36. 46. Warren , History, 1:184-85, 191; Phillips Payson , " A Sermon" (1778) , in Hyne man an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:534-35 ; Paine, "American Crisi s I, " in The Life and Major Writings, 57 . 47. Howard , "Sermon " (1773) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:201, 205 ; Bue l an d Buel , Way of Duty, 144 ; Laure l Thatche r Ulrich , "'Daughters o f Liberty': Religious Women i n Revolutionary New England," in Hoff man an d Albert, eds. , Women in the Age of the American Revolution, 211-43; Higginbotham, War of American Independence, 262 . 48. Georg e Washington t o John Hancock , Septembe r 2 , 1776 in Andrist, ed. , A Biography, 157 ; Georg e Washington , "Lette r t o Congress , Septembe r 24 , 1776, " i n American Military Thought, ed. Walter Millis (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1966), 12; Russell F . Weigley, History of the United States Army, enlarge d ed . (Bloomington : Indiana Universit y Press , 1984) , 30 ; "Caractacus, " Benjami n Rush , an d Samue l Adams, cited in Higginbotham, War of American Independence, 92 , 205—6. 49. Gross , Minutemen, 151-52 ; Benjamin Franklin , quoted in Higginbotham, War of American Independence, 439 ; William Manning , The Key of Liberty, ed. Michae l Merrill and Sean Wilentz (Cambridge : Harvard Universit y Press, 1993), 142.

Notes to Chapter 3 I 19 7 50. "Letter s from th e 'Federa l Farmer' III " (1787) , in The Origins of the American Constitution: A Documentary History, ed . Michae l Kamme n (Ne w York : Pengui n Books, 1986), 284; "John DeWitt , Essa y III" (1787) , in Ketcham , ed. , Anti-Federalist Papers, 312-13 ; anonymous, "Untitled " (1788) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:243. 51. Joh n Humble , "Untitled " (1787) , i n Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 1:225; Benjamin Workman , "Philadelphiensi s IV " (1787) , in Ibid. , 1:496 ; John Daw son, "An Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention " (1788) , in Ibid., 2:749 ; "The Impartial Examine r I , Par t 2 " (1788) , in Ibid. , 2:253 ; s ee ^ so "Brutu s IX " (1788) , in Ibid., 2:43. 52. Hamilton , FederalistNo. 24,161; FederalistNo. 28,180. 53. Ramsay , History, 1:199; 2:504-5, 624, 637; Dana, "Africa n Slav e Trade" (1791), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1049 . 54. Cesar e Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishments and Other Writings, ed . Richar d Bellamy, trans . Richar d Davie s (Cambridge : Cambridg e Universit y Press , 1995), 67; Franklin, "Tria l and Reprieve," in Lemay, ed., Writings, 140 . 55. Warren , History, 2:404-6; Georg e Washington t o John Laurens , Octobe r 13, 1780, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 143 ; John Andre, quoted i n Langguth , Patriots, 508; Alexander Hamilton to John Laurens, October 11,1780, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 91-92. 56. Benjami n Rush , An Enquiry into the Effects of Public Punishments Upon Criminals and Upon Society (1787), in Reform of Criminal Law, 5 ; idem, Considerations on the Injustice and Impolicy of Punishing Murder by Death (1792) , in Ibid. , 12 ; see also Michael Meranze , Laboratories of Virtue: Punishment, Revolution, and Authority in Philadelphia, 1760-183$ (Chape l Hill : Universit y o f Nort h Carolin a Press , 1996) , 69-70. 57. Rush , Enquiry, 4, 8,10,14; Cale b Lownes, "Account of the Alteration and Present State of the Penal Laws of Pennsylvania" (1793) , in Ibid., 77 ; John Howard , The State of Prisons (1777), in Walker, Popular Justice, 42 ; Benevolus, "Poverty " (1789) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:714. 58. Thoma s Jefferson t o Mari a Cosway , Octobe r 12 , 1786, in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 403 , 408; Otis, "Right s o f the Britis h Colonies " (1764) , in Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets, 1:425—26; John Dickinson , "Observation s o n the Constitutio n Proposed b y the Federa l Convention , III " (1788) , in Bailyn , ed. , The Debate on the Constitution, 2:409; Samue l Quarrie r t o Presiden t Thoma s Jefferson , Februar y 13 , 1802, in To His Excellency Thomas Jefferson: Letters to a President, ed. Jack McLaughli n (New York: Avon Books, 1991), 150. 59. Rush , Enquiry, 14; see Joseph M. Hawes, "Prison in Early Nineteenth Centur y America: The Proces s o f Convic t Reformation, " i n Hawes , ed. , Law and Order, 41 ; Walker, Popular Justice, 42. 60. Anonymous , "Rudiments o f Law and Government " (1783) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:591-92 ; Alexander Hamilto n t o Rufus King ,

198 I Notes to Chapter 3 October 1794 , in Kline, ed., A Biography, 327 ; see also Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishments, 58 . 61. Samue l P . Huntington, The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957), 144; Edward M. Coffman, The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784-18P8 (New York: Oxfor d Universit y Press , 1986) , chap . 1 ; Charles Lofgren , "Government from Reflection and Choice": Constitutional Essays on War, Foreign Relations, and Federalism (New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1986), chap. 2; see also Kann, On the Man Question, chap . 10. 62. Washingto n t o George Steptoe Washington, Marc h 23,1789, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 218-19 ; Atwater, " A Sermon" (1801) , in Hyneman an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, i:ny$. 63. Amicu s Republicae, "Address to the Public, Containing Some Remarks on the Present Politica l Stat e o f th e America n Republicks , etc. " (1786) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:653-655; see also Michael Grossberg, Governing the Hearth: Law and the Family in Nineteenth-Century America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolin a Press, 1985), 47, 49; Hall, Magic Mirror, 152 . 64. Washington , "Genera l Orders , March 1,1778," in Allen, ed., George Washington, 95; George Rogers Clark to George Mason, November 19,1779 , in Rutland, ed. , Papers of George Mason, 2:583; Alexander Hamilton t o Elias Boudinot, July 5,1778, in Kline, ed. , A Biography, 65 , 70; David Ramsay , "Oratio n a t Charleston , Sout h Car olina" (1788) , in Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 2:506; Edmund Randolph , "Address to the Virginia Legislature," October 10,1787, in Ibid., 1:604; Baldwin, "Oration" (1788), in Ibid., 2:522; Tench Coxe, "An American Citizen I" (1787), in Ibid., 1:23; idem, "A n American Citize n II " (1787) , in Ibid. , 1:25-26 ; "Civic Rusticus" (1788) , in Ibid., 1:357; Noah Webster, " A Citizen of America" (1787) , in Ibid., 1:132; Arthur Lee, "Cincinnatus V" (1787) , in Ibid. , 1:118 ; Warren, "Observation s o n th e Constitution " (1788), in Ibid. , 2:288 ; Webster, "Citize n o f America" (1787) , in Ibid. , 1:133 ; Pelatiah Webster, "A Citizen of Philadelphia" (1787), in Ibid., 1:182; Robert R. Livingston, "Address t o th e Ne w York Ratifyin g Convention " (1788) , i n Ibid. , 2:837 ; James Iredell , "Address to the North Carolin a Ratifying Convention " (1788) , in Ibid., 2:899. NOTES T O CHAPTE R 4

1. Franci s Bacon, quoted in Jonasdottir, Why Women Are Oppressed, 18 . 2. Webster , "Educatio n o f Youth i n America," i n Rudolph , ed. , Essays on Education, 53 . 3. Alexande r Hamilton , "O n Marriage " (1771) , i n Kline , ed. , A Biography, 17 ; Alexander Hamilto n t o Catherin e Livingston , April 11 , 1777, in Ibid. , 54 ; Alexander Hamilton t o Margarita Schuyler, February, 1780, in Ibid., 78-79. 4. Murray , "Story of Margaretta," in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 225 ; Alice Izard to Margaret Manigault , Ma y 29,1801, in Moynihan, Russett , an d Crumpacker , eds. ,

Notes to Chapter 4 I 19 9 Second to None, 1:202 ; anonymous , "Th e Maid' s Soliloquy " (1751) , i n Lauter , ed. , Heath Anthology, 1:703; Lewis, "Republican Wife," 694-96 , 699, 701-2, 706-7. 5. Washingto n t o Marqui s d e Chastellux , Apri l 25 , 1788 , i n Allen , ed. , George Washington, 393; Franklin, "Reply to a Piece of Advice" (1735), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 249-50; idem, "On Drunkenness " (1733) , in Ibid., 213-14; Webster, "Citizen of America" (1787), in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:149; see also Norton, Founding Mothers and Fathers, 136. 6. Georg e Savile, Marquis of Halifax, "Advic e to a Daughter," in Moynihan, Russett, and Crumpacker, eds. , Second to None, 1:130-31; Judith Sargen t Murray, "On th e Equality of the Sexes" (1790), in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:1016; Mary Fish Noyes, "Portrait of a Good Husband" (1773) , in Buel and Buel, Way of Duty,80; anonymous, "Impromptus, o n Readin g an Essay on Education , B y a Lady" (1773) , in Lauter , ed. , Heath Anthology, 1:704 ; see also "Letters fro m Eliz a Southgate t o He r Cousi n Mose s Porter" (1800-1802) , in Roots of Bitterness:Documents of the Social History of American Women, ed . Nancy F. Cott (Ne w York: Dutton, 1972) , 109. 7. Benjami n Franklin , "Rule s an d Maxim s fo r Promotin g Matrimonia l Happi ness" (1729), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 152; idem, "Reply to a Piece of Advice" (1735), in Ibid., 250 ; "Autobiography," 81 , 92, 109—10; see also Rush, "Thought s Upo n Femal e Education," in Rudolph, ed. , Essays on Education, 29 . 8. Downer , "Discourse " (1768) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:106; Jefferson, "Summar y View " (1774) , i n Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 13 ; Peter Thacher, " A Sermon Preache d befor e th e Artillary Com pany" (1793) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1145; George Washingto n t o Lun d Washington, November 26,1775 , in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 60 . 9. Georg e Washington t o Eleanor Parke Custis, January 16,1795, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 244 ; Franklin, "Autobiography, " 161-62 , 283; John Adams, "Discourses on Davila " (1789) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, YJ% John Adams to Abigail Adams, Apri l 12 , 1778, in Adams , ed. , Familiar Letters, 329; Adams t o John Taylo r (1814), in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 200 . 10. Barlow , "Lette r t o th e Nationa l Convention " (1792) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 2:824 ; Williams, "Natura l an d Civi l History of Vermont" (1794) , in Ibid., 2:952; Webster, "Revolution i n France" (1794), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1264 ; see also anonymous , "Rudiment s o f La w and Government " (1783), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:597. 11. Willia m Byrd's Commonplace Book, quoted in Lockridge, Sources of Patriarchal Rage, 14 ; Murray, "Sketc h o f the Present Situation o f America" (1794) , in Harris , ed., Selected Writings, 56 ; Coontz, Social Origins of Private Life, 155; An Impartial Citizen , "A Dissertation Upo n th e Constitutiona l Freedo m o f the Press " (1801), in Hynema n and Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1139 , n 68; se e als o Cott , "Eighteenth Century Family and Social Life," in Cott and Pleck, eds., A Heritage of Her Own, 120, 127; Norton, Liberty's Daughters, 43. 12. Demos , Past, Present, and Personal, 47; Norton, Founding Mothers and Fathers,

200 I Notes to Chapter 4 j6; Fliegelman , Prodigals and Pilgrims, 204; George Mason, in Madison, "Notes fro m the Constitutional Convention, " i n Mason an d Baker , eds., Free Government, 191 . 13. Maso n to George Mason, Jr., January 8,1783, in Rutland, ed. , Papers of George Mason, 2:762; Ava Baron , "Acquirin g Manl y Competence : The Demis e o f Apprenticeship an d th e Remasculinizatio n o f Printers ' Work, " i n Carne s an d Griffin , eds. , Meanings for Manhood, 162-63; Nash, Race, Class, and Politics, 246 , 248-49; see also Franklin, "Autobiography, " 109—10 ; Bernar d Bailyn , Education in the Forming of American Society (New York: Vintage Books, i960), 17. 14. Thoma s Paine , "Th e Right s o f Man" (1791-92) , in The Life and Major Writings, 288-89 ; Thomas Jefferson t o James Madison, Octobe r 28,1785 , in Peterson, ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 396. 15. Bue l and Buel , Way of Duty, 241 ; Nathanael Emmons , "Th e Dignit y of Man" (1787), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 907 ; Ramsay, History, 2:630 . 16. Charle s Cotesworth Pinckney , "Address to the South Carolina Ratifying Con vention" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:579—80 . 17. Thoma s Jefferson , "Autobiography, " i n Mayo , ed. , Jefferson Himself, 77-78; idem, "Draft Constitutio n fo r Virginia" (1776) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 249 ; Benjamin Frankli n to Jonathan Shipley , February 24,1786, in Lemisch, ed., Autobiography and Other Writings, 317 ; see also Kann, On the Man Question, 196 . 18. Bradford , Enquiry, in Reform of Criminal Law, 7—8 ; Adams, "Defenc e o f th e Constitutions" (1787) , in Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 149 ; Robert Coram , "Politica l Inquiries to which is Added a Plan for the General Establishment of Schools throughout the United States " (1791), in Rudolph, ed. , Essays on Education, 143 . 19. "Fro m th e 'Federa l Farmer ' t o th e 'Republican, ' Lette r V " (1787) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:282; "'The Republican' to the People" (1788), in Ibid., 1: 712; Webster, "Citizen o f America" (1787) , in Ibid., 1:157-58. 20. Franklin , "Autobiography, " 24 , 95; compare Wood, Radicalism, 129. 21. Yazawa , From Colonies to Commonwealth, 49—50, 74; Demos, Past, Present and Personal, 46 ; Thomas Jefferson, "Repor t o f the Commissioner s fo r th e University o f Virginia" (1818) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 345 ; John Dickinson , "Observations on the Constitution Propose d by the Federal Convention VTII" (1788), in Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 2:427; "Ploug h Jogger " (1788) , i n Ibid. , 2:415; Thacher, " A Sermon" (1793) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1146 ; see als o Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 5,12 . 22. Joh n Adams, "Thoughts o n Government " (1776) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 91 ; John Adams to Abigail Adams, August 28,1774, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 28 ; John Adams to Abigail Adams, April 15,1776, in Ibid., 159 ; Thomas Jefferso n to Pete r Carr , Augus t 19 , 1785, in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 381 ; Mason, "Mama, Rachel , and Molly," in Hoffman an d Albert, eds., Women in the Age of the American Revolution, 286 ; Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 33 . 23. Emmons , "Dignit y of Man" (1787) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 905-6 . 24. Jefferso n t o Adams, Octobe r 28 , 1813, in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas

Notes to Chapter 4 I 20 1 Jefferson, 534 ; Adams, "Defenc e o f th e Constitutions " (1787) , i n Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 135-37. 25. Joh n Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Decembe r 13,1785, in Cappon, ed. , AdamsJefferson Letters, 107 ; Thomas Jefferson t o John Adams, Decembe r 27 , 1785, in Ibid. , 112.

26. Georg e Mason to Patrick Henry, May 6,1783, in Rutland, ed., Papers of George Mason, 2:772-73; Thomas Jefferson t o John Adams, February 7,1786, in Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:119; Thomas Jefferson t o John Adams, November 13,1787, in Ibid., 1:211 .

27. Benjami n Franklin , "Proposal s Relatin g t o th e Educatio n o f Youth i n Penn sylvania" (1749), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 342; "Letter from Fathe r Abraham" (1758), in Ibid., 513-14 ; "Poor Richard's Almanack," i n Ibid., 1281; "Autobiography," 72-7 4 104, 112-13.

28. Jefferso n t o Thomas Jefferson Randolph , November 24,1808, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, $12-14; Thomas Jefferson t o John Saunderson , August 31,1820, in Mayo, ed., Jefferson Himself, 7; Jefferson t o Charles Bellini, September 30, 1785, in Ibid., 113. 29. Georg e Washington, "The Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation" (1741) , in Allen, ed., George Washington, 6-13; Georg e Washington to Josep h Reed , Decembe r 15 , 1775, in Fleming , ed. , Affectionately Yours, 71 ; idem, "Farewell Orders" (1783), in Allen, ed., George Washington, 268-69. 30. Warren , History, 1:128. 31. Paine , "Common Sense," in The Life and Major Writings, 17; "An Officer o f the Late Continental Army" (1787), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:104; Paine, "American Crisi s II, " in The Life and Major Writings, 69 ; "Cato I " (1787) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:32. 32. Howard , "Sermon " (1773) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:202 ; The Preceptor , "Socia l Dutie s o f the Politica l Kind " (1772) , in Ibid. , 1:180; George Mason, "Oppositio n t o a Unitary Executive " (1787) , in Ketcham , ed. , Anti-Federalist Papers, 47. 33. Gross , Minutemen, 71; John Adam s t o Abigai l Adams, Februar y 21 , 1777, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 248 ; Paine, "America n Crisi s I, " i n The Life and Major Writings, 50; idem, "American Crisis II," in Ibid., 63; Thomas Jefferson, "Fift h Annual Message to Congress" (1805) , in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 324 . 34. Webster , "Oration " (1802) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1237-38 ; George Washington t o David Stuart , Decembe r 30 , 1798, in Andrist, ed., A Biography, 399-400 . 35. Paine , "American Crisis XII," in The Life and Major Writings, 224, 227; Thomas Jefferson t o John Breckinridge , August 12,1803, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 497; see also Gross, Minutemen, 75 ; and Wills, Cincinnatus, 23 , where the author argues that Washington gaine d authority by his willingness to let go of it. 36. Bailyn , Education, 36; Jefferson, "Repor t o f the Commissioners," in Peterson ,

202 I Notes to Chapter 4 ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 336-37 ; Thomas Jefferson t o James Madison, September 6,1789, in Ibid., 445,449; Thomas Jefferson t o Samuel Kerchival, July 12,1816, in Ibid. , 559 ; Paine, "Right s o f Man, " i n The Life and Major Writings, 251; idem, "Common Sense, " i n Ibid. , 21 , 45; idem, "America n Crisi s VII, " i n Ibid. , 154 ; see Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 102, 205; Gross, Minutemen, 89 . 37. McClintock , "Sermon " (1784), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 801—2 ; Madison, FederalistNo. 14,104; Noah Webster, "Giles Hickory I" (1787), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:671 . 38. Jame s Madison t o Thomas Jefferson, Octobe r 24,1787, in Kammen, ed., Origins, 70; Madison, "Notes from th e Constitutional Convention," in Mason and Baker, eds., Free Government, 196; idem, "Debates in the House," in Veit, Bowling, and Bickford, eds. , Creating the Bill of Rights, 79-80 , 86; James Madison t o Thomas Jefferson , May 8,1793, in Peterson, ed., A Biography, 196. 39. "Joh n DeWit t I " (1787) , i n Ketcham , ed. , Anti-Federalist Papers, 192 ; "Joh n DeWitt II" (1787), in Ibid., 194; Patrick Henry, "Opening Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:596; Alexander Hamilton quote d i n Madison , "Note s fro m th e Constitutiona l Convention, " i n Mason and Baker, eds., Free Government, 196; Adams, "Defence of the Constitutions" (1787), in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 121 ; Lienesch, New Order of the Ages, 162. 40. Lienesch , New Order of the Ages, 209; Ramsay, History, 1:331; Thomas Jefferso n to Edward Carrington, January 16,1787, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 415; Thomas Jefferson, "Kentuck y Resolutions" (1798), in Ibid., 287 ; Thomas Jefferson t o John Adams, August 2,1788 , in Cappon, ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:230. 41. Adam s to Jefferson, Ma y 11,1794, in Cappon, ed., Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:255. 42. Paine , "Rights of Man," in The Life and Major Writings, 372-73; Warren, History, 2:520 . 43. Franklin , "O n Constancy " (1734) , in Lemay , ed., Writings, zz$—26; Frankli n t o John Alleyne, August 9,1768, in Ibid., 836-37; idem, "Information t o Those Who would Remove to America" (1784), in Ibid., 979; Samuel West, "On the Right to Rebel Against Governors: Election Day Sermon" (1776), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:439; Paine, "Rights of Man," in The Life and Major Writings, 338. 44. Thoma s Jefferson t o Edmun d Pendleton , Augus t 26 , 1776 , in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 356-57 ; Mason, quote d i n Madison , "Note s fro m th e Constitutional Convention, " i n Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 147 . 45. Franklin , quote d i n Madison , "Note s fro m th e Constitutiona l Convention, " in Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 148; Madison, "Notes from th e Constitutiona l Convention," in Ibid., 152. 46. Bloch , "Gendered Meanings of Virtue," 47; Rush, "Plan for the Establishment of Public Schools" (1786), in Rudolph, ed. , Essays on Education, 6. 47. Fishe r Ames, "Address to the Massachusetts Ratifyin g Convention " (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:894-95 (emphasis added); see also "Old State Soldier" (1788) , in Ibid., 2:37.

Notes to Chapter $ I 20 3 48. Joh n Jay, FederalistNo. 64, 395; Iredell, "Address to the North Carolin a Con vention" (1788) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:S66; Hamilton , FederaiistNo. 29 , 186; Zachariah Johnston, "Addres s to the Virginia Ratifyin g Convention " (1788), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:752 , 754. 49. Alexande r Hamilton, "Address to the New York Ratifying Convention" (1788), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:835; James Wilson, "Addres s to the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention " (1787) , in Ibid., 1:825. 50. Ramsay , History, 2:666; Timothy Pickerin g to Charle s Tillinghast, Decembe r 24,1787, in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:304. 51. Kerber , "'History Can Do It No Justice,'" in Hoffman an d Albert, eds., Women in the Age of the American Revolution, 32-33; idem, Women of the Republic, 199-200 ; Hoff, Law, Gender, and Injustice, 38 . 52. "Cat o III " (1787) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:218; Hamilton, FederaiistNo. 17,119. 53. Nash , Race, Class, and Politics, 257-58 ; Joseph Lathrop, "A Miscellaneous Col lection o f Origina l Pieces " (1786) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:660; see also Wood, Radicalism, 246 . 54. Joe l Barlow, "To His Fellow Citizens of the United States , Letter II : On Cer tain Politica l Measure s Propose d t o thei r Consideration " (1801) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1121 . 55. Rush , "Plan for th e Establishment o f Public Schools" (1786), in Rudolph, ed. , Essays on Education, 14; George Washington t o Joseph Jones, March 18,1783, in Allen, ed., George Washington, 228 ; George Washington t o Theodorick Bland , April 4,1783, in Ibid., 232. 56. Melancto n Smith , "Address to the New York Ratifying Convention " (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:762; "Brutus III " (1787) , in Ibid. , 1:321-22; Adams, "Defenc e o f th e Constitutions " (1787) , i n Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 147 ; Adams to Abigail Adams, October 29,1775 , in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 120 . 57. Adam s to Jefferson, Octobe r 9 , 1787, in Cappon , ed. , Adams-]efferson Letters, 1:202.

58. Se e Lienesch, New Order of the Ages, 171-74. 59. Tyler , "The Contrast" (1790) , in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:1117. 60. Nanc y F. Cott, "On Men's History and Women's History," in Carnes and Griffin, eds., Meanings for Manhood, 211 . NOTES T O CHAPTE R 5

i. Mar y O'Brien , The Politics of Reproduction (Boston : Routledge & Kega n Paul , 1981), 54 ; Pateman, Disorder of Women, 7; Juster, Disorderly Women, 211; Lockridge, Sources of PatriarchalRage, 68,105-6 . 2. Tyler , "The Contrast" (1790) , in Lauter, ed. , Heath Anthology, 1:1111 ; Ann Fair fax Withington, Toward a More Perfect Union: Virtue and the Formation of American

204 I Notes to Chapter $ Republics (New York: Oxford Universit y Press , 1991), 31; Murray, "Sketc h o f the Present Situation " (1794) , i n Harris , ed. , Selected Writings, 53-54; anonymou s visito r quoted i n Bushman, Refinement, 182 . 3. Frankli n t o Jan e Meco m (Jun e 1748) , i n Lemay , ed. , Writings, 438; Clark t o Mason, November 19,1779, in Rutland, ed. , Papers of George Mason, 2:555; Kent, "In troductory Lecture " (1794) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 2:949; Adams, "Discourses on Davila" (1789), in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 176. 4. Mayhew , "Th e Snar e Broken " (1766) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 255 , 260-61; Witherspoon, "Dominio n o f Providence " (1776) , in Ibid , 552 ; McClintock, "Sermon" (1784) , in Ibid., 800; Ramsay, History, 1:123, 1325 Warren, History, 1:84. 5. Greven , Protestant Temperament, 351-52 ; Withington , Toward a More Perfect Union, xiii-xiv, 16-17, 55,134,184, 208, 212, 215 . 6. Withington , Toward a More Perfect Union, 217, 224, 229, 235—36, 242 . 7. Paine , "Common Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings, 4-5; Shute, "Election Sermon" (1768), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:111; anonymous, "Rudiments o f Law and Government" (1783) , in Ibid., 1:568; Ford, "Th e Con stitutionalist" (1794) , in Ibid. , 2:911 ; Alexander Hamilto n t o John Jay, November 26, 1775, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 45. 8. Ramsay , History, 1:112,176, 305; Higginbotham, War of American Independence, 263; se e als o Henr y Cummings , " A Sermon Preache d a t Lexingto n o n th e 19t h o f April" (1781), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, Gji; Wales, "Dangers of Our Nationa l Prosperity" (1785) , in Ibid., 850. 9. Jame s Madison to George Nicholas, May 17,1788, in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:444; Ramsay, History, 2:631; Thomas Paine, "Common Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings, 36 ; Jefferson t o George Washington, April 16,1784, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 368-69; Jay, FederalistNo. 2, 38; Madison, FederalistNo. 14,103-4 . 10. Thoma s Jefferson t o Benjami n Franklin , John Adams, and John Jay, Octobe r 5, 1781 , in Cappon , ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:11; Pelatia h Webster , "Citize n o f Philadelphia" (1787) , in Bailyn, ed., The Debate on the Constitution, 1:567 . 11. Wales , "Dangers o f Our Nationa l Prosperity " (1785) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 850 ; Jefferson, "Note s on th e State of Virginia" (1781) , in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 213; Jefferson t o Washington , Apri l 16 , 1784 , i n Ibid. , 368-69; Payson , " A Sermon" (1778) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:527 ; George Mason t o Patrick Henry, May 6,1783, in Rutland, ed. , Papers of George Mason, 2:770; see also Mc Williams, The Idea of Fraternity in America, 92-93. 12. Georg e Washington t o John Jay, August 15 , 1786, in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 333; Washington, "Farewell Orders" (1783), in Ibid., 268-69; Alexander Hamilton, "Treasury Department Instructions," June 4,1791, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 247. 13. Anonymous , untitle d articl e from th e Boston Gazette (1763), in Hynema n an d Lutz, eds. , American Political Writings, 1:33; A n Impartia l Citizen , "Dissertation " (1801), in Ibid., 2:1134-35; Webster, "Revolution i n France" (1794), in Sandoz, ed., Po-

Notes to Chapter 5 I 20 5 litical Sermons, 1268 ; Thomas Jefferson t o Edward Rutledge , June 24,1797, in Mayo, ed., Jefferson Himself, 210; Madison, "Debate s i n th e House, " i n Veit , Bowling , an d Bickford, eds. , Creating the Bill of Rights,73 . 14. United States Magazine, quoted i n Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 112-13; The Polite Philosopher, quoted in Bushman, Refinement, 182, see also 29. 15. Bushman , Refinement, 43, 84, 411; Forrest McDonald, "Washington, Cato, and Honor: A Model fo r Revolutionar y Leadership/ ' i n Elaza r an d Katz , eds. , American Models, 55 ; The Preceptor, "Socia l Duties" (1772), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:178-79 ; Perkins, "Theor y o f Agency" (1771) , in Ibid. , 1:145; Adams, "Thoughts o n Government " (1776) , in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 91 . 16. Bushman , Refinement, 404. 17. Miller , "Sermon" (1793) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1157 ; George Washington t o Alexander Hamilton , Octobe r 3,1788 , in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, ny, Washingto n t o James Craik, Septembe r 8,1789 , i n Ibid. , 223 ; Alexander Hamil ton t o James McHenry, January 27-February 11,1798, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 358; Edmund Randolp h t o th e Virginia Legislature , October 10,1787 , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:597; John Stevens , Jr., "Americanu s VII " (1788) , in Ibid. , 2:58. 18. Madison , Federalist No. 10 , 82-83 ; Franklin , "Poo r Richard s Almanack, " i n Lemay, ed. , Writings, 1290 ; Atwater, "Sermon " (1801) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1178 ; Landon Carte r t o Georg e Washington, Octobe r 1776, in Fliegelman , Declaring Independence, 109 ; Wales, "Danger s o f Ou r Nationa l Prosperity" (1785), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 851 ; Webster, "Oration" (1802) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1233, 1237> idem , "Revolutio n in France" (1794), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1280; see also Wood, Radicalism, 58, 71,194-9519. Madiso n to Jefferson, Octobe r 24,1787, in Kammen, ed., Origins, 71 ; Murray, "Sketch of the Present Situation" (1794), in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 62-63; Fobes, "Election Sermon " (1795) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:993; Webster, "Oration " (1802) , in Ibid., 2:1229 ; see also Timothy Ford , "Th e Con stitutionalist" (1794) , in Ibid., 2:926-28; Maxey, "Oration" (1799) , in Ibid., 2:1048. 20. Norton , Founding Mothers and Fathers, 207 , 210; Martin Howard , Jr., "A Letter from a Gentleman a t Halifax" (1765) , in Bailyn, ed., Pamphlets, 1:542; Thomas Jefferson t o Abigai l Adams , Novembe r 1786 , i n Cappon , ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:157; Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Augus t 8,1804, i n Ibid., 1:276-77. 21. Georg e Mason to George Washington, March 19,1783, in Rutland, ed., Papers of George Mason , 1:763—65; Alexander Hamilton , "Accoun t o f a Duel betwee n Joh n Laurens and Charle s Lee" (1778), in Kline, ed., A Biography, 70. 22. Georg e Washington t o Lun d Washington , Septembe r 30 , 1776 , i n Fleming , ed., Affectionately Yours, 93 ; Parsons, "Esse x Result " (1778) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 1:503-4, 519. 23. Benjami n Franklin , "A n Accoun t o f th e Supremest Cour t o f Judicatur e i n

2o6 I Notes to Chapter $ Pennsylvania, vis. the Court of the Press" (1789), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 1152; George Washington to John Augustine Washington, May 1778, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 126; Wortman, "Solemn Address" (1800), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1527; Alexander Addison, "Analysis of the Report of the Committee of the Virginia Assembly" (1800) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1096-97 ; see Fobes, "Election Sermon" (1795) , in Ibid., 2:1010-11; An Impartial Citizen, "Disserta tion" (1801) , in Ibid., 2:1132-34. 24. A n Impartia l Citizen , "Dissertation " (1801) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1168 ; Benjamin Frankli n t o Georg e Whatley, Ma y 23, 1785, in Lemay, ed., Writings, 1105; Benjamin Frankli n t o George Washington, Marc h 5,1780, in Ibid., 1019; Murray, quoted in "Introduction," i n Harris, ed., Selected Writings, xliii. 25. Withington , Toward a More Perfect Union, 149-56, 242-43. 26. Charle s Pinckney, "Qualifications fo r Suffrage" (1787) , in Ketcham, ed., AntiFederalist Papers, 149; Webster, "Oration" (1802) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1223; Pelatiah Webster , "Citize n o f Philadelphia " (1787) , i n Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:181 ; Annis Boudinot Stockton , "Th e Vision, an Ode to Washington" (1789) , in Lauter, ed., Heath Anthology, 1:67% see also Iredell, "Address to the North Carolin a Convention" (1788) , in Bailyn, Debate on the Constitution, 2:883; Parsons, "Essex Result" (1778), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:519. 27. Elizu r Goodrich , "Th e Principle s o f Civil Unio n an d Happines s Considere d and Recommended " (1787) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 919-22 ; Wood, Radicalism, 276 . 28. Hamilton , Federalist No . 36 , 217 ; "Addres s t o th e Ne w Yor k Convention " (1788), i n Bailyn , Debate on the Constitution, 2:770-71; Livingston, "Addres s t o th e New York Convention" (1788) , in Ibid., 2: 778-79. 29. Smith , "Addres s to th e New York Convention" (1788) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:760-62 ; "From the 'Federal Farmer' t o the 'Republican,' Lette r III" (1787) , in Ibid., 1:260; "Brutus III" (1787), in Ibid., 1:321. 30. Wilson , "Addres s to the Pennsylvania Convention" (1787) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:825; Richard Henry Lee to George Mason, October 1,1787, in Ibid. , 1:45 ; Livingston , "Addres s t o th e Ne w Yor k Convention " (1788) , i n Ibid. , 2:778-79. 31. Samue l Bryan, "Centine l I " (1787) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1: 53; "Officer o f the Lat e Continenta l Army " (1787) , in Ibid. , 1:103 ; Luther Martin , "The Genuine Information I " (1787), in Ibid., 1: 638; Smith, "Address to the New York Convention" (1788) , in Ibid., 2:761. 32. Anonymous , "A Revolution Effected b y Good Sense and Deliberation" (1787), in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:13; Webster, "Citize n o f America" (1787), in Ibid., 1:162; James Madison to Edmund Randolph , January 10,1788, in Ibid., 1:745. 33. Thoma s B. Wait to George Thatcher, January 8,1788, in Bailyn, ed., Debate on

Notes to Chapter 5 I 20 7 the Constitution, 1: 727; Samuel Bryan , "Centine l II " (1787) , in Ibid., 1:78-79 ; idem, "Centinel VIII" (1788), in Ibid., 1:688; idem, "Centinel XII" (1788), in Ibid., 2:81. 34. Webster , "Revolution in France" (1794), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1279, 1288-91; John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Jul y 29,1791, in Cappon , ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:149; Joh n Adam s t o Samue l Adam s (1790) , i n Political Thought in America: An Anthology, ed. Michae l Lev y (Homewood , 111. : Dorsey, 1982) , 75-76 ; Wortman, "Solem n Address" (1800), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1519. 35. Manning , Key of Liberty, 129,136,138,139. 36. Jefferso n t o Adams, Octobe r 28 , 1813, in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 534 ; Jefferson t o Washington, April 16,1784, in Ibid., 368-69. 37. Alexande r Hamilton t o George Washington, May 5,1789, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 217 . 38. Paine , "American Crisi s VII," in The Life and Major Writings, 154 , Hoff, Law, Gender, and Injustice, 80-81 ; Ramsay, History, i:3o;Tappan, "Sermon " (1792) , in Sandoz, ed. , Political Sermons, 1113 ; Bishop James Madison , "Manifestations " (1795) , in Ibid., 1312 ; Adams, "Discourse s o n Davila " (1789) , i n Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 176-7739. Adams , "Discourse s o n Davila " (1789) , i n Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 192 ; Warren, History, 1:3; Stevens, "Americanu s V " (1787) , i n Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 1:489-90; anonymous, "Ambition " (1789) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 2:713 ; Paine, "America n Crisi s I," i n The Life and Major Writings, 52-53; idem, "American Crisis IV," in Ibid., 103; idem, "Occasional Letter on the Female Sex" (1775), in Kimmel and Mosmiller, eds., Against the Tide, 6$-66; "Bru tus X " (1788) , i n Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 2:88; see als o Jefferson t o Cosway, October 12,1786, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 405. 40. Murray , "Desultor y Thoughts " (1784) , i n Harris , ed. , Selected Writings, 45 ; Murray to Miss Palfrey, November 24,1776 , in Moynihan, Russett, and Crumpacker , ed., Second to None, 1:190. 41. Adair , "Fam e an d th e Foundin g Fathers, " 8 , 10-12 ; Ramsay , History, 1:106; George Washington t o Thomas Jefferson, Februar y 10 , 1783, in Fleming , ed. , Affectionately Yours, 172 ; Wills, Cincinnatus, 128-29, 165 ; Emerson, "Oration " (1802) , i n Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1568 ; see also Wood, Radicalism, 207 . 42. Jame s Madison to Thomas Jefferson, June 13,1793, in Peterson, ed., A Biography, 196 ; James Madison t o Thomas Jefferson, Jun e 19 , 1793, in Ibid. , 197 ; Duffield , "Sermon" (1783) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 784-85. 43. Shute , "Election Sermon" (1768), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:131; Payson, "A Sermon" (1778), in Ibid., 1:538; Madison, FederalistNo. 57, 351—52; Gouverneu r Morris , "Election an d Term of Office o f the National Execu tive" (1787), in Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 117 ; Hamilton, FederalistNo. 72, 437; Fobes, "Election Sermon" (1795), in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1010 .

44. Duffield , "Sermon " (1783), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 785; "A Cumber-

2o8 I Notes to Chapter 5 land Count y Mutua l Improvemen t Societ y Addresse s th e Pennsylvani a Minority " (1788), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:564. 45. Baldwin , "Oration" (1788), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:516-18, 523. 46. Stevens , "Americanus V" (1787), in Ibid., 1:492-93 . 47. Jefferson , "Note s on the State of Virginia" (1781), in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 196. 48. Ramsay , History, 1:288; Warren, "Observations on the Constitution" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:286; Warren, History, 2:401 . 49. Benjami n Frankli n to Lord Howe, July 20,1776, in Lemay, ed., Writings, 994; Ramsay, History, 2:550; Henry Laurens , quoted i n Ibid. , 2:594 ; s ee ^ so Washington , "General Orders, July 2,1776," in Allen, ed., George Washington, 71. 50. Jame s Madison to William Bradford , April 1,1774, in Peterson, ed., A Biography, 30 ; Gouverneur Morris , "Eulogy " (1804) , in Kline , ed. , A Biography, 407 ; Mc Clintock, "Sermon " (1784) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 809-10 . 51. Barker-Benfield , Culture of Sensibility, 88-91 ; Baron, "Acquirin g Manly Com petence," in Carnes and Griffin, Meanings for Manhood, 153 ; Grossberg, "Institution alizing Masculinity," in Ibid., 136; see also Franklin, "Autobiography, " 72-74. 52. Adams , "Discourse s o n Davila " (1789) , i n Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 177 ; Benjamin Franklin , quoted in Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, 77,112-15. 53. Clawson , Constructing Brotherhood, 15, 23, 52, 72-73,184-85, 259; Wood, Radicalism, 223 ; see also Higginbotham, War of American Independence, 440. 54. Mino r Myers, Jr., Liberty without Anarchy: A History of the Society of the Cincinnati (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1983), x, 17, 85-86, 93, 98,137. 55. Benjami n Frankli n t o Sarah Bache, January 26,1784, in Lemay, ed., Writings, 1084-85; Warren, History, 2:615; Myers, Liberty without Anarchy, 94,124; Thomas Jefferson t o James Madison , Decembe r 28 , 1794, i n Mayo , ed. , Jefferson Himself, 197; Manning, Key of Liberty,123,138,145; see also an anonymous article from th e 1788 Independent Gazetteer in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:243. 56. Jefferso n t o Madison , Decembe r 28 , 1794, in Jefferson Himself, 197; Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order, 57 ; Henry F . May, The Enlightenment in America (Oxford: Oxfor d Universit y Press , 1976) , 229-30 ; Manning , Key of Liberty, 157, 160-62,165.

57. Davi d Osgood , "Th e Wonderful Work s o f Go d ar e t o b e Remembered " (1794), i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1129-32 ; Webster, "Revolutio n i n France " (1794), i n Ibid. , 1278 ; Alexander Hamilton , "Letter s o f Pacificus, " Jul y 17 , 1793, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 308 ; George Washington t o Henry Lee, July 21,1793, in Andrist, ed., A Biography, 350-51; George Washington to Henry Lee, August 26,1794, in Ibid., 356; George Washington t o Alexander Hamilton, July 29,1795, in Ibid., 365. 58. Se e Georg e Washingto n t o Burges s Ball , Septembe r 25 , 1794, i n Allen , ed. , George Washington, 597 ; Thomas Jefferson, "Firs t Inaugural Address" (1801), in Peter son, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 291-92 .

Notes to Chapter 6 I 20 9 59. Madison , Federalist No. 10 , 82-83; Federalist No. 40, 253-54; Randolph, "Ad dress to th e Virginia Convention " (1788) , in Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 1:717.

60. Madison , Federalist No. 57 , 352; Hamilton, Federalist No. 35 , 214-16. 61. Davi d Howell , "Solon , Junior" (1788) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:534-35. NOTES T O CHAPTE R 6

i. Paine , "Common Sense, " in The Life and Major Writings, 29; Alexander Hamilton t o Robert Morris, August 13,1782, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 118; "Officer o f the Late Continental Army" (1787), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:97; Adams to Taylor (1814), in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 209; "Plough Jogger" (1788), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, Z'.^iy, Georg e Washington t o Georg e Mason, Marc h 27,1779, in Rutland, ed. , Papers of George Mason, 2:493. 2. Murray , "Observations on Female Abilities," in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 18, 23-24, 28; Paine, "American Crisis I," in The Life and Major Writings, 51 ; Teresa Brennan and Carole Pateman, "'Mere Auxiliaries to the Commonwealth': Women and th e Origins of Liberalism," Political Studies 27', 2 (June 1979): 183-200. 3. Henr y St . John, Lor d Bolingbroke , The Ldea of a Patriot King, in The Works of Lord Bolingbroke, 4 vols . (Philadelphia : Care y & Hart , 1841) , 2:374 , 377 ' 39 I_92> 395-97, 401, 407, 419, 422-23, 426, 428; see also Connell, Gender and Power, 183-85 . 4. Dulany , "Considerations " (1765) , i n Bailyn , ed. , Pamphlets, 1:620-21; Fitch , "Reasons" (1764) , in Ibid. , 1:394-95 ; Continental Congress , "Addres s t o th e Inhabi tants of Great Britain" (1775), in Ramsay, History, 1:177-78 . 5. Richar d Bland , "Th e Colone l Dismounted " (1764) , in Bailyn , ed. , Pamphlets, 1:324; Thatcher, "Sentiment s o f a British American" (1764) , i n Ibid. , 1:491 ; Warren, History, 1:61; Ramsay, History, 1:93, 97; Joseph Reed quoted in Higginbotham, War of American Independence, 101 . 6. Ralp h Ketcham, Presidents above Party: The First American Presidency, 1789—1829 (Chapel Hill : University of North Carolin a Press , 1984), x-xi, 73 , 76; George Washington t o Joseph Reed, July 4,1780, in Allen, ed., George Washington, 150-51 . 7. Katherin e Auspitz, "Civic Virtue: Interested and Disinterested Citizens," in Civility and Citizenship in Liberal Democratic Societies, ed . Edwar d C . Banfiel d (Ne w York: Paragon House , 1992), 19; Alexander Hamilto n t o Elizabeth Hamilton , July 13, 1781, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 98; Washington to Nathanael Greene, October 6,1781, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 155. 8. Appleby , Liberalism and Republicanism, 218-19 . 9. Georg e Washington t o Benjami n Lincoln , June 29 , 1788, in Fleming , ed. , Affectionately Yours, 209 ; se e als o Michae l Walzer , Exodus and Revolution (New York: Basic Books, 1985), esp. 51-53. 10. Joh n Adams , "Constitutio n o f Massachusetts " (1780) , i n Peek , ed. , Political

no I

Notes to Chapter 6

Writings, 98; Thomas Jefferson t o John Colvin, September 10,1810, cited in Ketcham, Presidents above Party, 172; Thomas Jefferson t o John Breckinridge, August 12,1803, in Mayo, ed. , Jefferson Himself, 250; Thoma s Jefferson , "Secon d Inaugura l Address " (1805), in Ibid., 249. 11. Se e Connell, Gender and Power, 184-85 . 12. Paine , "American Crisis V," in The Life and Major Writings, 116; George Washington t o Alexander Hamilton , Octobe r 29 , 1795, in Allen , ed. , George Washington, 615; Alexander Hamilto n t o Edward Carrington , Ma y 26,1792, in Mason an d Baker, eds., Free Government, 309. 13. Edmun d Randolph, quoted in Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 69; George Washington t o the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Marc h 10,1787 , in Allen, ed., George Washington, 358; Georg e Washingto n t o Alexande r Hamilto n quote d i n Clinto n Rossiter, "Introduction," i n Hamilton, Madison , and Jay, Federalist Papers, vi-vii. 14. Jay , Federalist No. 64 , 393. 15. Madison , FederalistNo. 40, 252-55; idem, FederalistNo. 43, 279; James Madison to Edmund Randolph , January 10,1788, in Kammen, ed., Origins, 97. 16. Alexande r Hamilton , i n Ketcham , ed. , Anti-Federalist Papers, 71; idem , "Speech to the New York Assembly" (January 19,1787), in Kline, ed., A Biography, 161; idem, FederalistNo. 25,167; idem, FederalistNo. 34, 207. 17. Madison , FederalistNo. 41 , 257; idem, FederalistNo. 63 , 384-85; Hamilton , FederalistNo. 71, 434-35. 18. Warren , "Observation s o n th e Constitution" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:296; Richard Henr y Lee to Edmun d Pendleton , Ma y 26, 1788, in Ibid., 2:463 ; Lienesch, New Order of the Ages, 148; Henry, "Addres s t o th e Virgini a Convention" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:626. 19. Goodrich , "Principles of Civil Union" (1787), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 919. 20. Yazawa , From Colonies to Commonwealth, 3—4,112; Wood, Radicalism, 149—50, 187; Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, i6j\ se e also Ketcham, Presidents above Party, 224—25; Gross, Minutemen, 191. 21. Ga d Hitchcock , "A n Electio n Sermon " (1774) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 1:299; Payson, "A Sermon" (1778) , in Ibid., 1:537; Cooper, "A Sermon" (1780) , in Sandoz , ed., Political Sermons, 643 , 652-53; McClintock, "Ser mon" (1784), in Ibid., 802, 806-7; Samuel Langdon, "The Republic of the Israelites as Example to the American States" (1788), in Ibid., 959, 965; Israel Evans, "A Sermon delivered a t th e Annual Election " (1791) , in Ibid. , 1070 ; Timothy Stone , "A n Electio n Sermon" (1792) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 2:846 , 854; Murray, "Sketches of the Present Situation" (1794), in Harris, ed., Selected Writings, 66; Fobes, "Election Sermon" (1795) , in Hyneman and Lutz, ed., American Political Writings, 2:996; Samue l Kendal , "Religio n th e Onl y Sur e Basi s o f Fre e Government " (1804), i n Ibid. , 2:1262 .

22. Wilson , "Addres s to the Pennsylvania Convention" (1787) , in Bailyn, ed., De-

Notes to Chapter 6 I 21 1 bate on the Constitution, 1:825; Zephaniah Swif t Moore , "An Oration o n the Anniversary of the Independenc e o f the Unite d State s o f America" (1802) , in Hynema n an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1214 ; Addison, "Analysi s of the Report of the Committee of the Virginia Assembly" (1800), in Ibid., 2:1063; Stockton, "The Vision, an Od e t o Washington" (1789) , in Lauter , ed. , The Heath Anthology, 1:679; Webster, "Revolution i n France " (1794) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1290 (emphasi s added). 23. Henr y Holcombe , " A Sermo n Occasione d b y th e Deat h o f Washington " (1800), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1409-11 . 24. Georg e Washington t o Henr y Laurens, January 31,1778, in Fleming , ed., Affectionately Yours, 119 ; Fobes, "Electio n Sermon " (1795) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1009 ; James Madison t o Thomas Jefferson, Octobe r 17,1788 , in Kammen, ed. , Origins, 371 ; James Madiso n t o Edmun d Randolph , June 15 , 1789, in Veit, Bowling , and Bickford, eds. , Creating the Bill of Rights,250; Edmund Randolp h to James Madison, June 30,1789, in Ibid., 256. 25. Langdon , "Republi c of the Israelites" (1788), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 957> 959 26. Mitchell , Vacant Chair, 52,116 . 27. Norton , Founding Mothers and Fathers, 15; "Philanthrop" (1787), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:327; Warren, History, 1:212; John Smalley , "O n th e Evils of a Weak Government" (1800) , in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1422-25,1430-33. 28. Griswold , "Overcoming Evil" (1801), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1551-52; see also Ketcham, Presidents above Party, 216 . 29. Abigai l Adam s t o Thoma s Jefferson , Septembe r 10 , 1787 , i n Cappon , ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:198; Tucker, "Electio n Sermon " (1774) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:167; Hitchcock, "Electio n Sermon" (1774), in Ibid., 1:293; Jay, FederalistNo. 2, 39; James Madison, "Vice s of the Political System of the United States " (1787), in Mason an d Baker, eds., Free Government, 160 . 30. Hamilton , Federalist No. 68 , 414 ; Adams, "Thought s o n Government, " i n Mason an d Baker , eds., Free Government, i^y, Goodrich , "Principle s o f Civil Union " (1787), in Sandoz , ed., Political Sermons, 919-20 ; Moore, "Oration" (1802) , in Hyne man and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:1217; Zabdiel Adams, "Election Sermon" (1782) , in Ibid., 1:552. 31. Stephe n Peabody, "Sermon before the General Court of New Hampshire at the Annual Election " (1797) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1326-29 , 1333 ; Wortman, "Solemn Address" (1800), in Ibid., 1527; Emmons, "Dignit y of Man" (1787) , in Ibid. , 898; Franklin , "Autobiography, " 131 ; "Speec h a t th e Constitutiona l Convention " (1787), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 1133 . 32. Madison , FederalistNo. 57, 350; John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Februar y 5, 1795, in Cappon , ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:256 ; Adams, "Defenc e o f the Consti tutions" (1787) , in Peek , ed. , Political Writings, 158 ; Livingston, "Addres s to th e Ne w York Convention" (1788) , in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 2:794.

212 I Notes to Chapter 6 33. Webster , "Oration " (1802) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:11^1; George Washington t o Bushrod Washington, Septembe r 30,1786, in Allen, ed., George Washington, 335-36 . 34. Barlow , "Lette r t o th e Nationa l Convention " (1792) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds., American Political Writings, 2:832 ; Roger Sherman, "Congressiona l Debates, " in Veit, Bowling, and Bickford, eds., Creating the Bill of Rights,151; see also Thomas Hartley, "Congressional Debates, " in Ibid., 151,161-62. 35. Madison , "Congressional Debates," in Veit, Bowling and Bickford, eds. , Creating the Bill of Rights,155 ; Jeremiah Wadsworth, "Congressiona l Debates," in Ibid., 156. 36. Smalley , "Evil s of a Weak Government " (1800) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 1422 ; John Adams to Abigail Adams, December 2,1781 , in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 396; Thomas Jefferson t o Elbridge Gerry, January 26,1799, in Peterson, ed., The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 477. 37. Wales , "Danger s o f our Nationa l Prosperity " (1785) , in Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 851 ; John Mitchel l Mason, "Th e Voice of Warning to Christians" (1800) , in Ibid., 1451-52; Henry, "Speeches" (1788), in Ketcham, ed., Anti-Federalist Papers, 200 ; Fobes, "Election Sermon" (1795), in Hyneman and Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 2:998 ; Atwater, "A Sermon" (1801), in Ibid., 2:1183 ; Ames, "Dangers of American Liberty" (1805), in Ibid., 2:1320. 38. Jame s Madison , "Publi c Opinion " (1791) , in Peterson , ed. , A Biography, 187 ; Washington, "Firs t Inaugural Message" (1790), in Allen, ed., George Washington, 469. 39. Locke , Two Treatises, bk . II, para. 160 ; idem, "Ol d England' s Lega l Constitu tion," in The Life of John Locke, ed . H. R . Fox Bourne, 2 vols. (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1876), 2:322-23; Bolingbroke, Idea of aPatriot King, 2:396, 413, 424-25. 40. Hitchcock , "Electio n Sermon " (1774) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:298—99 ; Jefferson, "Summar y View" (1774) , in Peterson, ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 21 . 41. Edmun d Randolph , "Debat e a t th e Constitutiona l Convention " (1787) , i n Ketcham, ed. , Anti-Federalist Papers, 69 ; idem, "Addres s to th e Virginia Legislature " (1787), i n Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 2:602; James Madiso n t o Georg e Washington, April 16,1787, in Peterson, ed., A Biography, 108-9 . 42. Howell , "Solon , Junior " (1788) , i n Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 2:534; see also Sheldon Wolin, "Th e Idea of the State in America," in The Problem of Authority in America, ed. John P . Diggins an d Mar k E . Kan n (Philadelphia : Temple University Press, 1981), 50-51. 43. Madiso n to Jefferson, June 13,1793, in Peterson, ed., A Biography, 196; Warren, History, 2:579 , 59144. Judit h N. Shklar, Ordinary Vices (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984), 145,177,184, 220; Murray Edelman, Political Language: Words That Succeed and Policies That Fail (New York: Academic Press, 1977), chap. 1. 45. Alexande r Hamilton , "Opinio n o n th e Constitutionalit y o f th e Ban k o f th e United States " (1791) , i n Maso n an d Baker , eds. , Free Government, 303; Alexander

Notes to Chapter 6 I 21 3 Hamilton t o James Duane, Septembe r 3 , 1780, in Kline , ed., A Biography, 87 ; idem, Federalist No. 71 , 432-34; Washington, "Genera l Orders , July 2, 1776," in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 71 ; George Washington t o John Hancock , Septembe r 2 , 1776, in Andrist, ed., A Biography, 157. 46. Paine , "American Crisis V," in The Life and Major Writings, 115-16,125. 47. Alexande r Hamilton , "Lette r t o hi s Fathe r publishe d i n th e Royal Danish American Gazette, October 3,1772," in Kline, ed., A Biography, 23; idem, FederalistNo. 74, 448 ; Washington, "Sevent h Annual Address" (1795) , in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 502 . 48. Joh n Thayer , " A Discours e Delivere d a t th e Roma n Catholi c Churc h i n Boston" (1798), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1344-45; George Washington, "Fragments o f th e Discarde d Firs t Inaugura l Address " (Apri l 1789) , in Allen, ed. , George Washington, 446 ; Coxe , "America n Citize n II " (1787) , in Bailyn , ed. , Debate on the Constitution, 1:25-26 . 49. Webster , "Citize n o f America" (1787) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:149; Emmons, "Discourse " (1799) , in Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1033-35; Adams, "Defence o f the Constitutions" (1787), in Peek, ed., Political Writings, 114. 50. Evans , "Sermon Delivered at Annual Election" (1791), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 1066-67; Fobes , "Electio n Sermon " (1795) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:998 . 51. "Brutu s IV" (1787), in Bailyn, ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:426-27. 52. Madison , FederalistNo. 49, 316; idem, FederalistNo. 46, 294-95; idem, Federalist No. 40 , 253-54; idem, FederalistNo. 57 , 353; idem, "Speec h Before th e House of Representatives" (June 8,1789), i n Mason an d Baker, eds., Free Government, 292 . 53. Hamilton , FederalistNo. 27,176. 54. Paine , "American Crisi s II," in The Life and Major Writings, 62 ; Warren, History, 2:668 . 55. Washingto n t o Hamilton , Octobe r 29,1795 , in Allen, ed., George Washington, 61$; Washington to Hamilton, May 8,1796, in Ibid., 631; see also Hamilton to Edward Carrington, May 26,1792, in Mason an d Baker, eds., Free Government, 309. 56. Alexande r Hamilton, "Th e Continentalist" (1781-1782) , in Mason and Baker, eds., Free Government, 148 ; Thomas Paine , "American Crisi s XIII," in Life and Major Writings, 231-32 ; Jefferson t o John Adams, July 11 , 1786, in Cappon , ed. , Adams-Jefferson Letters, 1:142; Jay, FederalistNo. 4, 49-50. 57. Alexande r Hamilton t o George Washington, May 2,1793, in Kline, ed., A Biography, 284 . 58. Madison , FederalistNo. 62, 380-82; Hamilton, FederalistNo. 11, 87, 91; idem, FederalistNo. 15,106; idem, FederalistNo. 30,189,191. 59. Jame s Madison to Thomas Jefferson, Februar y 18 or 19,1798, in Peterson, ed., A Biography, 218-19 ; James Madison t o Thomas Jefferson, Ma y 13,1798, in Ibid., 221; see also Ketcham, Presidents above Party, 172 .

214 I Notes to Chapter 6 60. Jame s Madison, "Addres s to th e People " (Januar y 23 , 1799), in Peterson , ed. , A Biography, 227 ; '"The Republican ' t o th e People" (1788) , in Bailyn , ed., Debate on the Constitution, 1:710-11; George Washington t o Charles Thomson, January 22,1784, in Fleming, ed., Affectionately Yours, 187 ; John Adams to Abigail Adams, July 2,1774, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 9; see also Anne Norton, Republic of Signs: Liberal Theory and American Popular Culture (Chicago: Universit y o f Chicag o Press , 1993) , 9 ; Wolin, Presence of the Past, 9. 61. Abigai l Adams to John Adams, May 9, 1776, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 170; William Pitt , quoted i n Warren, History, 2:506. NOTES T O CHAPTE R 7

i. Rotundo , American Manhood, chap. 2. 2. Barri e Thorne, Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School (New Brunswick , N.J. : Rutgers University Press, 1993), 92-93. 3. Josep h H. Pleck, "Men's Power with Women, Other Men, and Society," in Mens Lives, ed. Michael Kimme l an d Michae l Messne r (Ne w York: Macmillan Publishin g Co., 1989), 25; Connell, Gender and Power, no . 4. Willia m J . Goode , "Wh y Me n Resist, " i n Kimme l an d Messner , eds. , Mens Lives, 45, 49. Judith H . Stieh m remind s u s that me n wh o monopoliz e th e mean s o f protection ofte n institut e " a protection racket" ; se e her Bring Me Men and Women: Mandated Change at the U.S. Air Force Academy (Berkeley and Lo s Angeles: University of California Press , 1981), 299. 5. Gerzon , Choice of Heroes, 43 , 93; Leverenz, Manhood and the American Renaissance, 72—73 . 6. Barbar a Ehrenreich, The Hearts of Men: American Dreams and the Flight fromCommitment (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor/Doubleday, 1984), 11,13,47,50-51; David Popenoe, "Family Decline in America," in Rebuilding the Nest: A New Commitment to the American Family, ed. David Blankenhorn, Steven Bayme, and Jean Bethke Elshtain (Milwau kee: Family Service of America, 1990), 43,45,48; Dennis K. Orthne, "The Family in Transition," in Ibid., 95; Jean Bethke Elshtain, "The Family and Civic Life," in Ibid., 127-28. 7. Se e Appleby, Capitalism and a New Social Order, 15; Diggins, Lost Soul of American Politics, 66; Hoff, Law, Gender, and Injustice, chap . 1. 8. Rotundo , American Manhood, 17; McWilliams , Idea of Fraternity in America, 92; Sanfor d Lakoff , "Fro m th e Commo n Goo d t o th e Publi c Interest " (pape r pre sented t o th e Western Politica l Scienc e Association annua l meeting , Anaheim, Cali fornia, Marc h 1987) ; se e als o Rogin , Fathers and Children, 92-93; Rober t Boot h Fowler, The Dance with Community: The Contemporary Debate in American Political Thought (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1991), esp. chap. 3. 9. Bailyn , Faces of the Revolution, 259-60 . 10. Clawson , Constructing Brotherhood, 72-73; MarkC. Carnes , Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 32.

Notes to Chapter 7 I 21 5 11. Se e Kann, On the Man Question, chap. 10. 12. Davi d D . Gilmore , Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), 17-21, 87-89,108-10,124 . 13. Rober t Moore and Douglas Gillette, The King Within: Accessing the King in the Male Psyche (Ne w York : Avon Books , 1992) , 26 ; Gerzon , Choice of Heroes, 173-74 ; Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 205 ; Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 67; Dubbert, A Mans Place, 32-33; Filene, Him/Her/Self, 70-71,141. 14. Moor e an d Gillette , King Within, 234 ; Rogin, Fathers and Children, 141; Gerald F. Linderman, Embattled Courage: The Experience of Combat in the American Civil War (New York: Free Press, 1987), epilogue. 15. Filene , Him/Her/Self, 70; Cotton Mather , quoted in Demos, Past, Present, and Personal, 145 ; see also Kimmel, Manhood in America, 45-50. 16. France s Fitzgerald, Cities on a Hill: A Journey through Contemporary American Cultures (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981), 23; Robert Bly, Iron John: A Book about Men (Reading , Mass. : Addison-Wesley, 1990) , 8 , 14 , 16; Moore an d Gillette , King Within, 126,132,149,156 .

17. Phillip e Aries, Western Attitudes toward Death: From the Middle Ages to the Present, trans. Patricia Ranum (Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974), 59, 72. 18. Se e Bushman, Refinement, 120-22; Warren, History, 2:520; Jessica Mitford, The American Way of Death (New York: Fawcett Crest , 1978) , 191, 194; David C . Sloane , The Last Great Necessity: Cemeteries in American History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkin s University Press, 1991), 30-32; Aries, Western Attitudes toward Death, 78-79. 19. Fliegelman , Prodigals and Pilgrims, 14, 50-51 , 204 ; David E . Narrett , "Men' s Wills and Women's Property Rights in Colonial New York," in Hoffman an d Albert, eds., Women in the Age of the American Revolution, 129-30 ; Lois Carr Green , "Inheri tance in Colonial Chesapeake," in Ibid., 168; Mason, "Mama, Rachel, and Molly," in Ibid., 265 , 280-82; Shammas, Salmon, and Dahlin , Inheritance in America, 76. 20. Pateman , Disorder, 38; idem, Sexual Contract, 102; Harrington, The Commonwealth of Oceana, 62 , 81,103; see also Kann, On the Man Question , pt. 2. 21. O'Brien , Politics of Reproduction, 52-53 , 62; see also Judith H . Stiehm , "Gov ernment an d th e Family: Justice and Acceptance," in Changing Images of the Family, ed. Virginia Tufte an d Barbar a Myerhof f (Ne w Haven : Yale University Press , 1979), 369. 22. Rober t Jay Lifton, The Future of Immortality and Other Essays fora Nuclear Age (New York: Basic Books, 1987) , 3, 13-15; J. Glen n Gray , The Warriors: Reflections on Men in Battle (New York: Harper & Row , 1967), 46. 23. Rober t Jay Lifton, "Woma n as Knower," in History and Human Survival (New York: Random House , 1970), 265-74. 24. Rober t Ja y Lifton , Revolutionary Immortality: Mao Tse-tung and the Chinese Cultural Revolution (New York : Rando m House , 1968) , 8 , 69-70 ; idem , "Protea n Man" and "The Young and Old: Notes on a New History," in History and Human Survival, 319, 321-22, 345, 355; see also Ryan, Cradle of the Middle Class, 176-77.

216 I Notes to Chapter 7 25. Demos , Past, Present, and Personal, 45-46; see also Locke, Some Thoughts Concerning Education, 151, 246-49; Wood, Radicalism, 194-95. 26. Se e Bushman, Refinement, 29; Clawson, Constructing Brotherhood, 52 ; Shklar, Ordinary Vices, 78 ; Don Sabo , "Pigskin, Patriarchy , and Pain, " in Kimme l and Messner, eds., Mens Lives, 185—86. 27. Washington , "Rule s of Civility" (1741), in Allen, ed., George Washington, 6-13; Bushman, Refinement, 402 ; David G . Smith , "Professiona l Responsibilit y and Politi cal Participation, " i n Participation in Politics, ed . J . Rolan d Pennoc k an d Joh n W . Chapman (Ne w York: Lieber-Atherton , 1975) , 227; see also Mar k E . Kann , Middle Class Radicalism in Santa Monica (Philadelphia : Templ e Universit y Press , 1986) , 44-49; Charles Kesler, "Civility and Citizenship in the American Founding," in Banfield, ed. , Civility and Citizenship, 60 . 28. Mitchel l Duneier , Slims Table: Race, Respectability, and Masculinity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), 110-13. 29. Barbar a MyerhofT , Number Our Days (New York: Simo n & Schuster , 1978) , 180-83. 30. Ibid. , 223-24 , 266 .

31. Gillett e an d Moore , King Within, 151-54 ; Garrison Keillor , The Book of Guys (New York: Penguin Books , 1993), 14; Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women s Development (Cambridge: Harvar d Universit y Press , 1982), chap. 3. 32. Bly , Iron John, 8, 22; Moore and Gillette, King Within, 7; Gerzon, Choice of Heroes, 2-3 . 33. Eugen e V . Debs , Writings and Speeches of Eugene V Debs, ed . Arthu r Schlesinger, Jr. (New York: Hermitage Press, 1948), 225. 34. Hartz , Liberal Tradition in America, 129; Wood, Creation of the American Republic, 605-6. 35. Duffield , "Sermon " (1783) , i n Sandoz , ed. , Political Sermons, 780; Lienesch , New Order of the Ages, 179. 36. Fo r studie s o f nineteenth-centur y manhood , se e Rotundo , American Manhood, Kimmel, Manhood in America; Dubbert, A Mans Place, Leverenz, Manhood and the American Renaissance, Carnes and Griffin, eds. , Meanings for Manhood, Pugh, Sons of Liberty. 37. Se e Kimmel, "Contemporary 'Crisis' of Masculinity," in Brod, The Making of Masculinities, 140-53 ; John W. Chambers, "Conscripting for Colossus, " in The Military in America: From the Colonial Era to the Present, ed . Pete r Karsten , ne w rev. ed. (New York: Free Press, 1986), 297-311. 38. Willia m James, "The Moral Equivalent of War," in International War: An Anthology, ed . Melvin Smal l and J. Davi d Singer , 2 d ed. (Chicago : Dorsey Press, 1989), 328-36; Randolph S. Bourne, "A Moral Equivalent for Universal Military Service," in War and the Intellectuals: Collected Essays, ipif-ipip (Ne w York: Harper & Row, 1964), 142-47; Filene, Him/Her/Self, 97. For a recent proposal for national youth service, see

Notes to Chapter 7 I 21 7 Benjamin Barber , An Aristocracy of Everyone: The Politics of Education and the Future of America (New York: Ballantine Books, 1992), chap. 7. 39. R . W. Connell , "Masculinity , Violence , an d War, " i n Kimme l an d Messner , eds., Mens Lives, 197; Moore and Gillette, King Within, in; se e also Murray Edelman, The Symbolic Uses of Politics (Urbana: Universit y o f Illinois Press , 1964), 76; Fliegelman, Prodigals and Pilgrims, 215 . 40. Thoma s Jefferson t o Roge r Weightman, June 24 , 1826, in Peterson , ed. , The Portable Thomas Jefferson, 584-85 . 41. Se e Kerber , Women of the Republic, ii^.-iy, May , Enlightenment in America, 225-26.

42. Rotundo , American Manhood, 17; Murray, "Desultor y Thoughts " (1784) , i n Harris, ed. , Selected Writings, 46 , 48 ; Pateman, Sexual Contract, Hoff , Law, Gender, and Injustice, chap . 1. 43. Mather , "America's Appeal" (1775), in Sandoz, ed., Political Sermons, 483; Mayhew, "Th e Snar e Broken " (1766) , i n Ibid. , 248 ; Benjami n Frankli n t o Madam e Helvetius, Septembe r 19 , 1779 , i n Lemisch , ed. , Autobiography and Other Writings, 314-315; Timothy Dwight, quoted in Bushman, Refinement, 194-95; Bloch, "Gendered Meanings of Virtue," 43; Parsons, "Essex Result" (1778) , in Hyneman an d Lutz, eds., American Political Writings, 1:497 ; Rush, "Thought s upo n Femal e Education" (1787) , in Rudolph, ed., Essays on Education, 27-40; Franklin, "Celia Single" (1732), in Lemay, ed., Writings, 189-90 ; Jefferson t o Barbe-Marbois , Decembe r 5 , 1783, in Mayo , ed. , Jefferson Himself, 43. 44. Webster , "Oration " (1802) , i n Hynema n an d Lutz , eds. , American Political Writings, 2:1234 ; Franklin, "O n Constancy " (1734) , in Lemay , ed. , Writings, 225-26 ; idem, "On Drunkenness" (1733), in Ibid., 213-14; John Adams to Abigail Adams, June 3,1778, in Adams, ed., Familiar Letters, 334; John Adams to Abigail Adams, August 25, 1776, in Ibid., 218-19; s ee a l s o Fliegelman , Declaring Independence, 32,130; Tyler, "The Contrast" (1790) , in Lauter, ed., The Heath Anthology, 1:1102-42 . 45. Foster , The Coquette (1797), i n Lauter , ed. , The Heath Anthology, 1:1150-68; Fliegelman, Declaring Independence, 38 ; Hamilton, Federalist No. 6 , 54 , 56-57; John Adams to Abigail Adams, April 14,1776, in Mason an d Baker , eds., Free Government, 119-20.

46. Se e Norton, Liberty's Daughters, esp . chap. 5 ; Kerber, Women of the Republic, 285; Kann, On the Man Question, chap . 9.

Bibliography

PRIMARY SOURCE S

Adams, John . The Political Writings of John Adams. Edite d b y Georg e Peek . Indi anapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co. , 1954. Adams, John, and Abigail Adams. Familiar Letters of John Adams and His Wife Abigail Adams during the Revolution. Edited b y Charle s Franci s Adams . Freeport , N.Y. : Books for Librarie s Press, 1970. Adams, John, Abigai l Adams, an d Thomas Jefferson. The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and Abigailand John Adams. Edited by Lester J. Cappon. 2 vols. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959. Anonymous. An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex. London: A. Roper & E . Wilkinson, 1696. . A Farther Essay Relating to the Female Sex. London: A. Roper & E . Wilkinson, 1696. Astell, Mary. The First English Feminist: Reflections upon Marriage and Other Writings by Mary Astell. Edite d by Bridget Hill. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1986. Bailyn, Bernard , ed . The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters during the Struggle over Ratification. 2 vols. New York: Library of America, 1993. , ed. Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750—1776. 2 vols. Cambridge: Har vard University Press, 1965. Beccaria, Cesare. On Crimes and Punishments and Other Writings. Edited by Richard Bellamy. Translated by Richard Davies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Bolingbroke, Lor d Henr y St . John. The Idea of a Patriot King. In The Works of Lord Bolingbroke. 4 vols. Philadelphia: Carey & Hart, 1841. Chudleigh, Lady Mary. The Ladies Defence, or, the Bride-Woman's Counselor Answe/d. London: John Deeve , 1701. Cott, Nanc y E , ed . Roots of Bitterness: Documents of the Social History of American Women. New York: Dutton, 1972. Crevecoeur, J. Hecto r St . John de . Letters from an American Farmer. Ne w York: Penguin, 1981. Debs, Eugene V. Writings and Speeches of Eugene V. Debs. Edited by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. New York: Hermitage Press, 1948.

219

220 I Bibliography Fletcher, Andrew, of Saltoun. A Discourse of Government with relation to Militias. Edinburgh, 1698. Franklin, Benjamin . The Autobiography and Other Writings. Edited b y L . Jess e Lemisch. New York: New American Library, 19 61. . Writings. Edited b y J . A . Leo n Lemay . Ne w York : Librar y o f America , 1987. Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Edited by Quintin Hoar e and Geoffrey Nowel l Smith. New York: International Publishers , 1971. Greer, Germain, Susan Hastings, Jeslyn Medoff, and Melinda Sansone, eds. Kissing the Rod. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1988. Hamilton, Alexander. A Biography in His Own Words. Edite d by Mary-Jo Kline. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison, an d John Jay. The Federalist Papers. Edite d b y Clinton Rossiter . New York: New American Library , 1961. Harrington, James. The Commonwealth of Oceana. London : J. Streater, 1656. Hume, David. A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited by L. A. Selby-Bigge. Oxford: Ox ford Universit y Press, 1968. Hyneman, Charles S., and Donald S. Lutz, eds. American Political Writings during the Founding Era, 1760-180$. 2 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1983. Jefferson, Thomas. Jefferson Himself The Personal Narrative of a Many-Sided American. Edited by Bernard Mayo. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1970. . The Political Writings of Thomas Jefferson. Edite d b y Edward Dumbauld . In dianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1955. . The Portable Thomas Jefferson. Edite d b y Merrill D . Peterson . Ne w York : Viking Press, 1975. Kammen, Michael, ed. The Origins of the American Constitution: A Documentary History. New York: Penguin Books , 1986. Katz, Jonathan, ed . Gay American History: Lesbians and Gay Men in the U.S.A. New York: Harper & Row, 1976. Ketcham, Ralph, ed. The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates. New York: New American Library , 1986. Kimmel, Michae l S. , ed. Mundus Foppensis (1691) and The Levellers (1/03). Augustan Reprint Society , no. 248. Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library , 1988. Lauter, Paul, ed. The Heath Anthology of American Literature. 2 vols. 2d ed. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath & Co., 1994. Levy, Michael , ed . Political Thought in America: An Anthology. Homewood , 111. : Dorsey, 1982. Locke, John. The Educational Writings of John Locke. Edite d b y James Axtell. Cam bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968. . "Old England' s Legal Constitution." I n The Life of John Locke, edited by H. R. Fox Bourne. 2 vols. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1876.

Bibliography I 22 1 . Two Treatises of Government. Edited by Peter Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Madison, James. A Biography in His Own Words. Edited by Merrill D. Peterson. New York: Harper & Row, 1974. Manning, William. The Key of Liberty. Edited b y Michael Merrill and Sea n Wilentz. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993. Mason, Alpheus Thomas, and Gordon E. Baker, eds. Free Government in the Making: Readings in American Political Thought. 4th ed. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1985. Mason, George. The Papers of George Mason, 1779-1786. Edited by Robert A. Rutland. 3 vols. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolin a Press, 1970. McLaughlin, Jack, ed . To His Excellency Thomas Jefferson: Letters to a President. Ne w York: Avon Books, 1991. Millis, Walter, ed. American Military Thought. Indianapolis : Bobbs-Merrill, 1966. Moynihan, Rut h Barnes , Cynthi a Russett , an d Lauri e Crumpacker , eds . Second to None: A Documentary History of AmericanWomen. 2 vols. Lincoln: Universit y o f Nebraska Press, 1993. Murray, Judith Sargent . The Gleaner. Schenectady , N.Y.: Union Colleg e Press, 1992. . Selected Writings of Judith Sargent Murray. Edited by Sharon M. Harris. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1995. Nussbaum, Felicity, ed. Satires on Women. Augustan Reprint Society, no. 180. Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1976. Paine, Thomas. The Life and Major Writings of Thomas Paine. Edited b y Phili p S . Foner. New York: Citadel Press , 1961. . "An Occasional Letter on the Female Sex." 1775. In Against the Tide: Pro-Feminist Men in the United States, 1776-ippo: A Documentary History, edited by Michael S. Kimmel and Thomas F. Mosmiller. Boston : Beacon Press, 1992. Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution. 1789. 2 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1990. Reform of Criminal Law in Pennsylvania: Selected Inquiries, 1787—1819. New York: Arno Press Reprint, 1972. Rudolph, Frederick, ed. Essays on Education in the Early Republic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965. Rush, Benjamin . An Address to the Inhabitants of the British Settlements on the Slavery of Negroes in America. 1773. Ne w York: Arno Press Reprint, 1969. . My Dearest Julia: The Love Letters of Dr. Benjamin Rush. New York: Neal e Watson Academic Publications, 1979. . Vindication of the Address to the Inhabitants of the British Settlements, on the Slavery of Negroes in America in Answer to a Pamphlet entitled, "Slavery not Forbidden in Scripture; Or a Defence of the West-Indian Planters fromtheAspersions thrown out against them by the Author of the Address!' 1773. New York: Arno Press Reprint, 1969.

222 I Bibliography Sandoz, Ellis , ed . Political Sermons of the American Founding Era, 1730-180$. Indi anapolis: Liberty Press, 1991. Sidney, Algernon . Discourses Concerning Government. 2 d ed . London : Joh n Darby , 1704.

Taylor, John. Arator: Being a Series of Agricultural Essays, Practical and Political in SixtyFour Numbers. 1803. Edited by M. E. Bradford. Indianapolis : Liberty Press, 1977. Toland, John. The Militia Reform d; or an Easy Scheme of Furnishing England with a Constant Land Force capable to prevent or to subdue any Forein Power, and to maintain perpetual Quiet at Home, without endangering the Publick Liberty. London: John Darby , 1698. Trenchard, John . An Argument Shewing That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy. London , 1697. Tyrrell, James . Patriarcha non Monarcha: The Patriarch Unmonarch'd. London : Richard Janeway, 1681. Veit, Helen E. , Kenneth R . Bowling, and Charlene Bangs Bickford, eds . Creating the Bill of Rights: The Documentary Record from the First Federal Congress. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991 . Warren, Mercy Otis. History of the Rise, Progress and Termination of the American Revolution, interspersed with Biographical, Political and Moral Observations. 1805 . Edited by Lester H. Cohen . 2 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1988. Washington, George . Affectionately Yours, George Washington: A Self Portrait in Letters of Friendship.Edite d by Thomas J. Fleming. New York: Norton, 1967. . A Biography in His Own Words. Edite d b y Ralp h K . Andrist . Ne w York : Harper & Row, 1972. . George Washington: A Collection. Edited by W. B. Allen. Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1988. SECONDARY SOURCE S

Abramovitz, Mimi. Regulating the Lives of Women: Social Welfare Policy fromColonial Times to the Present. Boston : South End Press , 1988. Adair, Douglass . Fame and the Founding Fathers: Essays by Douglass Adair. Edite d b y Trevor Colbourn. New York: Norton, 1974. Appleby, Joyce. Capitalism and a New Social Order: The Republican Visions of the1790s. New York: New York University Press, 1984. . Liberalism and Republicanism in the Historical Imagination. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992. Arendt, Hannah . The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958. Aries, Phillipe. Western Attitudes toward Death: From the Middle Ages to the Present. Translated b y Patrici a Ranum . Baltimore : John s Hopkin s Universit y Press , 1974-

Bibliography I 22 3 Arnold, Marybeth Hamilton . "Th e Life of a Citizen i n the Hands of a Woman: Sexual Assault in New York City, 1790 to 1820." In Passion and Power: Sexuality in History, edited by Kathy Peiss and Christin a Simmons. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989. Bailyn, Bernard . Education in the Forming of American Society. Ne w York : Vintag e Books, i960. . Faces of the Revolution: Personalities and Themes in the Struggle for American Independence. New York: Random House , 1992. . The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. Ball, Terence. Reappraising Political Theory New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1994. Ball, Terence , an d J . G . A . Pocock , eds . Conceptual Change and the Constitution. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1988. Banfield, Edwar d C , ed . Civility and Citizenship in Liberal Democratic Societies. New York: Paragon House, 1992. Barber, Benjamin. An Aristocracy of Everyone: The Politics of Educationand the Future of America. New York: Ballantine Books, 1992. Barker-Benfield, G . J. The Culture of Sensibility: Sex and Society in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. Becker, Carl. The Declaration of Independence:A Study in the History of PoliticalIdeas. New York: Random House , 1970. Blankenhorn, David , Steve n Bayme , an d Jea n Bethk e Elshtain , eds . Rebuilding the Nest: A New Commitment to the American Family. Milwaukee: Famil y Servic e o f America, 1990. Blewett, Mary H. Men, Women, and Work: Class, Gender, and Protest in the New England Shoe Industry, 1780-ipio. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988. Bloch, Rut h H . "Th e Gendere d Meaning s o f Virtu e i n Revolutionar y America. " Signs: Journal of Women in Culture andSociety13,11 (1987) : 37-58. Bly, Robert. Iron John: A Book about Men. Reading , Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1990. Bourne, Randolph S . War and the Intellectuals: Collected Essays, ipi$-ipip. Ne w YorkHarper & Row, 1964. Brennan, Teresa , an d Carol e Pateman . "'Mer e Auxiliarie s t o th e Commonwealth' : Women an d th e Origin s o f Liberalism." Political Studies 27, 2 (June 1979) : 183 — 200.

Buel, Joy Day, and Richar d Buel , Jr. The Way of Duty: A Woman and Her Family in Revolutionary America. New York: Norton, 1984. Bushman, Richard. The Refinement of America: Persons, Houses, Cities. New York: Random House , 1992. Butler, Melissa. "Early Liberal Roots of Feminism: John Lock e and the Attack on Patriarchy." American Political Science Review 72 (March 1978): 135-50. Carnes, Mark C . Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America. New Haven : Yale University Press, 1989.

224 I Bibliography Carnes, Mark C, an d Clyde Griffin, eds . Meanings forManhood: Constructions of Masculinity in Victorian America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. Chambers, John W. "Conscriptin g fo r Colossus. " I n The Military in America: From the Colonial Era to the Present, edited by Peter Karsten. New rev. ed. New York: Free Press, 1986. Clawson, Mar y Ann . Constructing Brotherhood: Class, Gender, and Fraternalism. Princeton: Princeton Universit y Press, 1989. Coffman, Edwar d M . The Old Army: A Portrait of the American Army in Peacetime, 1784-1898. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1986. Connell, R . W . Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Stanford: Stanford Universit y Press, 1987. . Masculinities. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press , 1995. Coontz, Stephanie . The Social Origins of Private Life: A History of American Families 1600-1900. London : Verso, 1988. Cott, Nanc y R , and Elizabet h H . Pleck , eds. A Heritage of Her Own: Toward a New Social History of American Women. Ne w York: Simon & Schuster, 1979. D'Emilio, John , an d Estell e Freedman . Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America. New York: Harper & Row, 1988. Degler, Carl. At Odds: Women and the Family in America from the Revolution to the Present. Oxford : Oxfor d Universit y Press, 1980. Demos, John. A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony. Oxford : Ox ford Universit y Press, 1970. . Past, Present, and Personal: The Family and the Life Course in American History. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1986. Diggins, John P . The Lost Soul of American Politics. New York: Basic Books, 1984. Di Stefano, Christine. Configurations of Masculinity: A Feminist Perspective on Modern Political Theory. Ithaca : Cornell University Press, 1991. Dubbert, Joe L. A Mans Place: Masculinity in Transition. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979. Duneier, Mitchell. Slims Table: Race, Respectability, and Masculinity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. Edelman, Murray. Political Language: Words That Succeed and Policies That Fail. New York: Academic Press, 1977. . The Symbolic Uses of Politics.Urbana : University of Illinois Press, 1964. Ehrenreich, Barbara . The Hearts of Men:American Dreams and the Flight from Commitment. Garden City : Anchor/Doubleday, 1984. Elazar, Daniel J., and Ellis Katz, eds. American Models of Revolutionary Leadership: George Washington and Other Founders. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992. Filene, Peter G . Him/Her/Self: Sex Roles in Modern America. 2d ed. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986. Fitzgerald, Frances . Cities on a Hill: A Journey through Contemporary American Cultures. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981.

Bibliography I 22 5 Fliegelman, Jay. Declaring Independence: Jefferson, Natural Language, and the Culture of Performance. Stanford: Stanfor d Universit y Press, 1993. . Prodigals and Pilgrims: The American Revolution against Patriarchal Authority, 1750-1800. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1982. Fowler, Rober t Booth . The Dance with Community: The Contemporary Debate in American Political Thought. Lawrence : University Press of Kansas, 1991. Fraser, Antonia. The Weaker Vessel. New York: Random House , 1984. Gerzon, Mark. A Choice of Heroes: The Changing Face of American Manhood. Boston: Houghton Mifflin , 1982 . Gilligan, Carol . In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge: Harvard Universit y Press, 1982. Gilmore, Davi d D . Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990. Gray, J. Glenn. The Warriors: Reflections on Men in Battle. New York: Harper & Row, 1967. Greven, Philip. The Protestant Temperament: Patterns of Child-Rearing, Religious Experience, and Self in Early America. New York: Knopf, 1977. Gross, Robert A. The Minutemen and Their World. New York: Hill & Wang, 1976. Grossberg, Michael. Governing the Hearth: Law and the Family in Nineteenth-Century America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolin a Press, 1985. Gundersen, Joa n R . "Independence , Citizenship , an d th e America n Revolution. " Signs: Journal of Women in Culture andSociety13,11 (1987) : 59—77 . Hall, Kermit . The Magic Mirror: Law in American History. Ne w York: Oxford Uni versity Press, 1989. Hartsock, Nancy . "Th e Barrack s Communit y i n Wester n Politica l Thought : Prole gomena t o a Feminist Critiqu e o f War an d Politics. " I n Women and Mens Wars, edited by Judith H . Stiehm . Oxford: Pergamon , 1983. . Money, Sex, and Power: Toward a Feminist Historical Materialism. New York: Longman, 1983. Hartz, Louis. The Liberal Tradition in America. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1955. Hawes, Joseph M. , ed . Law and Order in American History. Port Washington, N.Y. : Kennikat Press, 1979. Higginbotham, Don . The War of American Independence: Military Attitudes, Policies, and Practices, 1763-1789. Boston : Northeastern Universit y Press, 1983. Hinton, R . W. K. "Husbands, Fathers and Conquerors. " Political Studies15, 3 (October 1967): 291-300. Hoff, Joan. Law, Gender, and Injustice: A Legal History of U.S. Women. New York: New York University Press, 1991. Hoffman, Ronald , and Peter Albert, eds. Women in the Age of theAmerican Revolution. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1989. Huntington, Samue l P. The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957.

226 I Bibliography James, William. "Th e Moral Equivalent o f War." In International War: An Anthology, edited by Melvin Small and J. David Singer. 2d ed. Chicago: Dorsey Press, 1989. Jonasdottir, Ann a G . Why Women Are Oppressed. Philadelphia : Templ e Universit y Press, 1994. Juster, Susan . Disorderly Women: Sexual Politics and Evangelicalism in Revolutionary New England. Ithaca : Cornell University Press, 1994. Kann, Mark E. Middle Class Radicalism in Santa Monica. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986. . On the Man Question: Gender and Civic Virtue in America. Philadelphia : Temple University Press, 1991 . Keillor, Garrison. The Book of Guys. Ne w York: Penguin Books , 1993. Kerber, Linda K. Women of the Republic: Intellect and Ideology in Revolutionary America. Chape l Hill : University of North Carolin a Press, 1980. Kerber, Linda K., Nancy F. Cott, Lyn n Hunt, Carrol l Smith-Rosenberg, an d Chris tine Stansell . "Forum : Beyon d Roles , Beyon d Spheres : Thinking abou t Gende r in th e Earl y Republic. " William and Mary Quarterly, 3d ser. , 6 4 (Jul y 1989) : 565-85. Ketcham, Ralph . Presidents above Party: The First American Presidency, i/8p—i82p. Chapel Hill : University of North Carolin a Press, 1984. Kimmel, Michae l S . "Th e Contemporar y 'Crisis ' o f Masculinit y i n Historica l Per spective." In The Making of Masculinities:The New Mens Studies, edite d by Harry S. Brod. Boston: Allen & Unwin, 1987. . Manhood in America: A Cultural History. Ne w York: Free Press, 1996. Kimmel, Michae l S. , an d Michae l Messner , eds . Mens Lives. New York: Macmillan , 1989. Lakoff, Sanford . "Fro m th e Commo n Goo d t o th e Public Interest." Pape r presente d to the Western Political Science Association annual meeting, Anaheim, California , March 1987. Langguth, A . J. Patriots: The Men Who Started the American Revolution. New York: Simon & Schuster , 1988. Lerner, Gerda. The Creation of Patriarchy.Ne w York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1986. Leverenz, David . Manhood and the American Renaissance. Ithaca : Cornell Universit y Press, 1989. Lewis, Jan . "Th e Republica n Wife : Virtu e an d Seductio n i n th e Earl y Republic. " William and Mary Quarterly, 3d ser., 44 (October 1987) : 689-721. Lienesch, Michael . New Order of the Ages: Time, the Constitution, and the Making of Modern American Political Thought. Princeton : Princeton University Press, 1988. Lifton, Rober t Jay. The Future of Immortalityand Other Essays for a Nuclear Age. New York: Basic Books, 1987. . History and Human Survival. New York: Random House , 1970. . Revolutionary Immortality: Mao Tse-tung and the Chinese Cultural Revolution. New York: Random House , 1968.

Bibliography I 22 7 Linderman, Geral d F . Embattled Courage: The Experience of Combat in the American Civil War. Ne w York: Free Press, 1987. Lloyd, Genevieve . The Man of Reason: "Male" and "Female" in Western Philosophy. 2 d ed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press , 1993. Lockridge, Kenneth . A New England Town: The First One Hundred Years. Ne w York: Norton, 1970. . On the Sources of Patriarchal Rage: The Commonplace Books of William Byrd and Thomas Jefferson and the Gendering of Power in the Eighteenth Century. New York: New York University Press, 1992. Lofgren, Charles . "Government from Reflection and Choice": Constitutional Essays on War, Foreign Relations, and Federalism. Ne w York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1986. Matthews, Glenna. The Rise of Public Woman: Woman's Power and Women's Place in the United States, 1630-1970. Ne w York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1992. May, Henry F. The Enlightenment in America. Oxford: Oxfor d Universit y Press, 1976. McWilliams, Wilson Carey . The Idea of Fraternity in America. Berkeley and Lo s Angeles: University of California Press , 1973. Meranze, Michael . Laboratories of Virtue: Punishment, Revolution, and Authority in Philadelphia, iy 60-183$.Chape l Hill: University of North Carolin a Press, 1996. Mitchell, Reid. The Vacant Chair: The Northern Soldier Leaves Home. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1993. Mitford, Jessica. The American Way of Death. New York: Fawcett Crest, 1978. Moore, Robert, and Douglas Gillette. The King Within: Accessing the King in the Male Psyche. Ne w York: Avon Books, 1992. Morgan, Edmund . "Th e Puritan s an d Sex. " New England Quarterly 1 5 (1942) : 591-607. Myerhoff, Barbara . Number Our Days. Ne w York: Simon & Schuster, 1978. Myers, Minor , Jr. Liberty without Anarchy: A History of the Society of the Cincinnati. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1983. Nash, Gar y B . Race, Class, and Politics: Essays on American and Colonial Society. Ur bana: University of Illinois Press, 1986. Norton, Anne . Republic of Signs: Liberal Theory and American Popular Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. Norton, Mar y Beth. Founding Mothers and Fathers: Gendered Power and the Forming of American Society. New York: Knopf, 1996. . Liberty's Daughters: The Revolutionary Experience of American Women, iy$o-i8oo. Boston: Little, Brown, 1980. O'Brien, Mary . The Politics of Reproduction. Boston : Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981 . Pateman, Carole . The Disorder of Women: Democracy, Feminism and Political Theory. Stanford: Stanfor d Universit y Press, 1989. . The Sexual Contract. Stanford : Stanfor d Universit y Press, 1988. Pateman, Carol e an d Elizabet h Gross , eds . Feminist Challenges: Social and Political Theory. Boston : Northeastern Universit y Press, 1986.

228 I Bibliography Pitkin, Hann a Fenichel . Fortune Is a Woman: Gender and Politics in the Thought of Niccolo Machiavelli. Berkele y an d Lo s Angeles : Universit y o f Californi a Press , 1984.

Pugh, Davi d G . Sons of Liberty: The Masculine Mind in Nineteenth-Century America. Westport, Conn. : Greenwoo d Press , 1983. Robbins, Caroline. The Eighteenth-Century Commonwealthman: Studies in the Transmission, Development and Circumstances of English Liberal Thought fromthe Restoration of Charles II until the War with the Thirteen Colonies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 19 61. Rogin, Michael Paul. Fathers and Children: Andrew Jackson and the Subjugation of the American Indian. New York: Random House , 1975. Rotundo, E . Anthony. American Manhood: Transformations in Masculinity from the Revolution to the Modern Era. New York: Basic Books, 1993. . "Patriarch s an d Participants : A Historical Perspectiv e on Fatherhoo d i n th e United States." In Beyond Patriarchy: Essays by Men on Pleasure, Power, and Change, edited by Michael Kaufman. Ne w York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1987. Ryan, Mar y P . Cradle of the Middle Class: The Family in Oneida County, New York, 1790-1865. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1981 . . Womanhood in America: From Colonial Times to the Present. 3d ed. New York: Franklin Watts, 1983. Schloesser, Pauline. "Republican Motherhood , Moder n Patriarchy , and the Questio n of Woman Citizenshi p i n Post-Revolutionar y America. " Pape r presente d a t th e Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C. , August 29-September 1,1991 . Schochet, Gordo n J. The Authoritarian Family and Political Attitudes in SeventeenthCentury England: Patriarchalism in Political Thought. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1988. Schwoerer, Lois G. "No Standing Armies!" The Anti-Army Ideology of Seventeenth-Century England. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974. Shammas, Carol , Marylyn n Salmon , an d Miche l Dahlin . Inheritance in America: From Colonial Times to the Present. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987. Shanley, Mary Lyndon. "Marriage Contract and Social Contract in Seventeenth-Century English Political Thought." Western Political Quarterly^!, 1 (March 1979): 79-91. Shklar, Judith . American Citizenship: The Quest for Inclusion. Cambridge: Harvar d University Press, 1991 . . Ordinary Vices. Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1984. Shuffelton, Frank , ed . A Mixed Race: Ethnicity in Early America. New York: Oxfor d University Press, 1993. Sloane, David C . The Last Great Necessity: Cemeteries in American History. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991 . Smith, Davi d G . "Professiona l Responsibilit y and Political Participation." I n Partici-

Bibliography I 22 9 pation in Politics, edited by J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman. New York: Lieber-Atherton, 1975. Stansell, Christine. City ofWomen: Sex and Class in New York: 1789-1860. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987. Stiehm, Judith H. Bring Me Men and Women: Mandated Change at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Berkele y and Los Angeles: University of California Press , 1981 . . "Government an d the Family: Justice and Acceptance." In Changing Images of the Family, edited b y Virginia Tufte an d Barbar a Myerhoff . Ne w Haven : Yale University Press, 1979. Stone, Lawrence . The Family, Sex, and Marriage in England, 1500-1800. Ne w York : Harper & Row, 1977. Tarcov, Nathan. Locke's Education for Liberty. Chicago: Universit y o f Chicago Press , 1984. Theweleit, Klaus . Male Fantasies. Translate d b y Stephen Conway , Eric a Carter , an d Chris Turner. 2 vols. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press , 1987,1989. Thorne, Barrie . Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School. Ne w Brunswick: Rutgers Uni versity Press, 1993. Walker, Samuel. Popular Justice:A History of American Criminal Justice. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1980. Walzer, Michael. Exodus and Revolution. New York: Basic Books, 1985. Weigley, Russell R History of the United States Army. Enlarged ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984. Western, J. R . The English Militia in the Eighteenth Century. London: Routledg e & Kegan Paul, 1965. Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. Oxford : Oxfor d Universit y Press, 1977. Wills, Garry . Cincinnatus: George Washington and the Enlightenment. Garde n City , N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984. Withington, Ann Fairfax . Toward a More Perfect Union: Virtue and the Formation of American Republics. New York: Oxford Universit y Press, 1991. Wolin, Sheldon , "Th e Ide a of the State in America." I n The Problem of Authority in America, edited by John P . Diggins and Mark E. Kann. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1981 . . The Presence of the Past: Essays on the State and the Constitution. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989. Wood, Gordo n S . The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787. Ne w York: Norton, 1969. . The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Ne w York: Knopf, 1992. Yazawa. Melvin. From Colonies to Commonwealth: Familial Ideology and the Beginnings of the American Republic. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985.

Index

Adair, Douglass , 34,12 1 Adams, Abigail, 9 , 25 , 30, 41, 57, 88,141,153,17 6 Adams, John, 30 , 33, 48, i n, 133,141-42,144 , 148-49,153; and authority , 25 , 46, 95,176 ; and famil y spirit , 89-90,102 ; an d fraterna l life, 125 ; and gende r similarities , 175 ; and marriage, 83; and militar y service , 92; o n mobs, 24 , 57 ; and th e natura l aristocracy , 118; and th e passio n fo r distinction , 120 ; o n property, 37 , 87; and rape , 62 ; and women , 18-19, 3 2> 57> 60; and youth , 58 , 88 Adams, Samuel , 19 , 40, 69 , 71 Adams, Zabdiel , 141 Addison, Alexander, 138 African-American males , 1,15, 20 , 77,107,158 , 168. See also Slaves Alexander th e Great , 131 Alien an d Seditio n Acts, 95,14 8 Allen, John, 3 4 Ames, Fisher , 22 , 49, 98 Ames, Richard , 3 2 "Amicus Republicae, " 7 7 Andre* Major John , 73-7 4 Antifederalists, 42 , 45,108,149,159; an d change , 94-95; and families , 102 ; and language , 49 , 77; an d th e natura l aristocracy , 116-19 ; and prerogative, 137 ; against standin g armies , 7 2 Antimaritalism, n , 22,53 , 60 , 80,158 . See also Marriage Appleby, Joyce, 14,17, 25,133,15 9 Arendt, Hannah , 4 9 Aries, Phillipe , 163 Arnold, Benedict , 12 4 Arnold, Marybet h Hamilton , 6 2 Articles o f Confederation, 45 , 77, 94,135,13 8 Astell, Mary, 9,5 3 Atwater, Jeremiah, 76 Auspitz, Katherine , 133 Authority, 28-29 , IQ 6> 113,131,140 ; defiance to ,

24-25,100,107; an d individualism , 22 ; and kindness, 81 , 87-88,148; and language , 15354; skepticism of , 8 , 46,103-4, n 5> I 33> J59> 173. See also Heroes; Leadershi p Bachelors, 3 , 21, 35,52, 83-84, 88, 96, 98,101 , i n , 127,130,143,157,160,171,175; Englis h precedents, 53-56 ; against manhood , 55-56 , 79; punishment s for , 61 ; ridiculing of , 56 ; stigmatizing a s children, 58-59 , 76-78; an d sedition, 53-54 ; as slaves to passion , 53 , 81 Backwoodsmen, 42 , 65-66,107,15 9 Bacon, Francis , 79,13 4 Bailyn, Bernard , 1 , 24, 59, 93,159 Baldwin, Simeon , 48 , 77,12 3 Ball, Terence, 25 Barker-Benfield, G . J., 13 Barlow, Joel, 21 , 32, 57, 63, 83,101,142 Battle o f the sexes , 7, 32 Beccaria, Cesare , 73-7 4 Behn, Aphra, 53 Bill o f Rights, 42, 94,13 9 Bland, Richard , 13 2 Bloch, Ruth , 17 , 61, 98 Bly, Robert, 16 3 Bolingbroke, Lord , 131,14 5 Boston Tea Party , 33,13 2 Bourne, Randolph , 17 2 Boy culture, 156-5 7 Bradford, William , 62-64 , 8 7 Brennan, Teresa, 130 "Brutus," 102,116,14 9 Bryan, Samuel , 117-18 Burr, Aaron, 113 Bushman, Richard , 12,110-11,16 8 Byrd, William, 8 4 Caesar, Augustus, 131 Caesar, Julius, 131

231

232 I Index "Caractacus," 7 1 Carnes, Mark , 16 0 Carroll, Charles , 6 0 "Cato," 42,10 0 Chastellux, Marqui s de , 81 Cincinnati, Societ y of the, 46, 71-72,102,119 , 126-27 Citizenship: earned , 29-31 , 33; and famil y status , 7, 79-80 , 87, 96-100,120,128,130,155,171, 175-76; and gender , 1-2,16-18 , 39, 99-100; limits of , 100-104 ; m a l e exclusion s from , 52 , 76-77; and passivity , 170-73 ; and property , 1, 38-39; truncated, 102-4 . See also Women "Civic Rusticus, " 7 7 Civility, 14,16 , 54 , 58, 90-91,109-12,115,120, 151,155,167-69,174,176-77 Clark, Georg e Rogers , 77,10 6 Clawson, Mar y Ann, 12 5 Clinton, DeWitt , 125-2 6 Commoners, 23-24,104,163 . See also Gentlemen Common Sense , 3, 30 Connell, R . W, 28,134,15 7 "Constant Customer , A" 4 2 Constitutional Convention , 38 , 45, 97,135,143, I45> 153 Continental Congress , 107,13 2 Coontz, Stephanie , 8 4 Cooper, Samuel , 34,13 8 Coquette, 6-7,17 6 Coram, Robert , 8 7 Cosway, Maria , 2 3 Cott, Nanc y R , 6,11,10 4 Coverture, 3 8 Coxe, Tench, 77,14 8 Crevecoeur, J. Hecto r St . John de , 20, 44-45, 65 Criminal justic e system , 52 . See also Punishment Dana, James, 2 0 Daughters o f Liberty, 31 Dawson, John, 7 2 Debs, Eugene , 17 0 Declaration o f Independence, 17 3 Democratic disorders , 1,14 , 25-26 , 31, 43, 49, 52, 72, 79-80, 98,103,105,109,130-31,155,17 3 Democratic Societies , 126-2 7 Demos, John, 7 , 84,16 7 "DeWitt, John, " 72 , 9 4 Dickinson, John, 40 , 74, 88 Diggins, John, 14,15 9 Di Stefano , Christine , 19

Downer, Silas , 34, 82 Dubbert, Joe , 17 Duffield, George , 36,121-2 2 Dulany, Daniel , 38,13 1 Duneier, Mitchell , 168-6 9 Dwight, Theodore, 66 D wight, Timothy, 1 2 Edelman, Murray , 14 7 Edwards, Jonathan Jr., 6 4 Effeminacy, 3,12-13,16-17,19 , 22 , 28, 31, 53, 69, 76,105-7,12°> J 34> J 43> I 56» J 7 2 Elizabeth I , Queen , 14 5 Emerson, William, 46,12 1 Emmons, Nathanael , 86 , 88-89, x 49 Evangelicalism, 2,1 4 Evans, Israel, 138,14 9 Factionalism, 42-43 , 46, 49,51,105, n o, 126-27 , 150,159 Fame, 29 , 34, 45,50,119-24,131,151. See also Infamy Families, 8 , 36; dynasties, 7, 23 , 33, 36, 39, 79-81, 85-87, 92-93,100,102-3, I2I > 164-67,169 ; versus individualism, 84-85 , 97,159; an d parochialism, 100-104 ; and politica l corrup tion, 102 ; and politics , 98-99,165 ; surrogate , 166-67. See also Fatherhood; Marriage ; Sons ; Women Fatherhood, 84-85 ; and citizenship , 96-100 ; edu cating youth, 87-91 ; and famil y welfare , 7 , 84-87, 91-93 ; flawed, 101 ; and friendship , 9 , n ; limit s of , 8-12 ; and obsolescence , 94-95; and politics , 140 ; and self-sacrifice , 2 , 89, 92. See also Sons Fathers, 49; civic, 8,137-41,150,164-65; fathe r figures, 47,130,138-39,148-49,167 ; fore fathers, 31 , 33-36,146,173; honoring of , 164 "Federal Farmer, " 72,11 6 Federalist Papers, 1 8 Federalists, 159 ; and change , 94-95 ; and families , 98-99,102; and language , 48,138 ; and leader ship, 99,122,135-37 ; and maturity , 77; an d the natura l aristocracy , 116-1 9 Ferrars, Sir George, 5 6 Filene, Peter, 17,16 2 Filmer, Si r Robert, 164-6 5 Fitch, Thomas, 33,13 1 Fletcher, Andrew, 55

Index I Fliegelman, Jay, 8, 25, 84, 88,16 4 Fobes, Peres , 42, 49,112,122,138,14 9 Ford, Timothy, 2 0 Foster, Hanna h Webster , 6 , 21,17 6 Franklin, Benjamin , 30 , 73, 87,101,106,124, 126,142; and bachelors , 56-59 ; and citizen ship, 97-98 ; on civility , 90; and economi c opportunity, 6 ; and fraternity , 125,159 ; o n gender similarities , 21 , 23,174-75; a n d Indi ans, 65 ; and lust , 59 ; on marriage , 7 , 35, 81 83; and th e press , 114; on property , 36 , 86; reputation of , 117-18,123 ; and soldiers , 70-71 ; and vagrants , 6 5 Fraternity, 40-43,105-7, 12 °> I2 -5-27,167; as fel low feeling, 106,128,149-50,152 ; an d futur e generations, 44-45 ; and individualism , 14 , 43, 159-60,169; interclass, 110-11,128 ; international, 106,151 ; limits of , 128-29 ; a n d nation ality, 108-9,127-2 9 Freemasonry, 46,125-26,16 0 Galloway, Grace , 11 Gates, Genera l Horatio , 12 4 Gender turbulence , 2,15 , 26-27,159-63,173-7 4 Gentlemen, 23-24 , 46, 54,102-4 , no-12,117,163 . See also Commoners George III , King , 131-32,14 0 Gerry, Elbridge , 5 7 Gerzon, Mark , 157,16 1 Gettysburg Address, 4 7 Gilligan, Carol , 17 0 Gilmore, David , 16 1 Goode, William, 15 7 Goodrich, Elizur , 115,14 1 Gould, Robert , 5 3 Grammar o f Manhood, 1 , 3, 29,124,155,176 ; and hegemony , 50-51 ; idiom o f childishness , 77-78,156-58; agains t individualism , 159-63 ; rules of , 35 , 39, 43, 47, 50 ; uses of , 30 , 52, 72, 76-77 , 79-80,104-5, 1 2 o, 130-31,139 , 153-54 Gramsci, Antonio, 2 8 Gray, J. Glenn , 16 6 Great Awakening, 6 Greene, Nathanael , 133 Gregory, John, 6 Greven, Philip , 17 , 31,106 Griswold, Stanley , 3 , 34-35,140 Gross, Robert , 39 , 57, 71, 92 Gundersen, Joan, 16-1 7

23 3

Haines, David , 16 4 Hall, Kermit , 6 9 Hamilton, Alexander , 60 , 73 , 75, 77, 94, 98-100, 109, i n , 113,127-28,145,148 ; an d fame , 122 , 124; and foreig n policy , 151-52 ; and leader ship, 133,135-36,138,147 ; o n marriage , 80 ; on men' s nature , 21 , 23,107; and th e natura l aristocracy, 116,119 ; and necessity , 45-46,13537; and standin g armies , 7 2 Harrington, James, 9,16 5 Hartsock, Nancy , 16 , 49 Hartz, Louis , 1,15,170-71 Hegemony, 1 , 3-4, 26 , 28,139,155,170,173,177 ; and masculinity , 28-29 , 31, 50, 76-77, 82,134 , 157,171; and patriarchy , 137-43 ; m peacetime , 143-50 Henry, Patrick , 30 , 90, 94,137,14 4 Henry VIII, King , 145 Heroes, 34 , 46,155,167,176-77; characteristic s of, 141-42,148-49 ; and law , 133-34,137,14346; nee d for , 129-31,140-42,170-73 ; and pre rogative, 136 ; and publi c opinion , 143-46; and publi c trust , 148-50 ; against women, 79 , 133-35. $ ee a k° Leadershi p Heroines, 130-3 1 Higginbotham, Don , 69 , 71,10 8 Hill, Jeremiah, 4 8 Hinton, R . W K. , 12 Hitchcock, Gad , 137,141,14 5 Hobbes, Thomas, 18 , 32 Hoff, Joan, 1,17,100,159,17 4 Holcombe, Henry , 139 Howard, Martin , 113 Howard, Simeon , 70 , 9 2 Howe, Genera l William, 19 , 41,124,134,14 7 Howell, David , 12 9 "Humble, John," 7 2 Hume, David , 5 4 Hutchinson, Thomas , 33 "Impartial Citizen , An," 8 4 "Impartial Examiner, " 7 2 Indian males , 1,15, 37 , 65-66, 77,107,15 8 Individualism, 14 , 22, 43, 84-85, 97,159-63,16972 Infamy, 119,123-24,13 4 Instruction schemes , 142-4 3 Iredell, James, 9 8 Itinerants, 64-6 5 Izard, Alice, 8 0

234 I

Index

James, William, 17 2 Jay, John, 98,108,135,141,15 1 Jay Treaty, 151 Jefferson, Thomas , 22-23 , 3°' I02 > IQ 8> 113,127, 144,173-75; and citizenship , 97 ; on civility , 90, n o ; an d families , 34 , 82, 88-90, 93 ; and foreign policy , 151,153 ; and fraternity , 40-41 , 126-27; on th e Frenc h Revolution , 44-45 , 95; and generationa l change , 93-95 ; and India n males, 65 ; and Louisian a Purchase , 6,134 , 137; and lust , 59-60 ; and marriage , 60 , 83; and misogyny , n , 21 , 32; and th e natura l aris tocracy, 116,118-19 ; and prerogative , 46,13334,145,153; o n property , 36-37 , 85-86; an d sociability, 74,109 ; o n Shays' s Rebellion , 44 45, 95; on slavery , 67-69 ; on women' s domes ticity, 43

Leverenz, David , 158 Lewis, Jan, 1 7 Liberalism, 14 ; conservative cor e of , 3,163,171 ; and gender , 17 , 26-27 Libertines, 6-7,13,15 , 20 , 51 , 53, 58, 60, 62 , 64, 88,105,107,131. See also Antimaritalism; Bachelor; Rape ; Sex Lienesch, Michael , 39 , 95,103,137,171-7 2 Lifton, Rober t Jay, 166-6 7 Lincoln, Abraham, 4 7 Linderman, Gerald , 16 2 Livingston, Robert , 116,14 2 Lloyd, Genevieve , 18

Jeffersonians, 1 5 Johnson, Lyndon , 15 8 Johnston, Zachariah , 9 9 Jonasdottir, Anna , 18 , 32 Juster, Susan , 6,1 7

Machiavelli, Niccolo , 16,13 4 Madison, Bisho p James, 4 9 Madison, James, 38,58 , 94, n o, 112,117,121,155 ; and Bil l o f Rights, 42, 94,139; and citizen ship, 98 ; and foreig n policy , 152-53 ; and fra ternal unity , 42,108,128,150 ; an d leadership , 122,135-36,138,141-43,145-46; an d necessity , 45> 135-36 Male bonding : citizen s an d leaders , 99,115,149 50; fathers an d sons , 32-35, 39, 50, 89-90, 96 ; fraternal bonds , 40-43,104,108,160 ; inter generational tensions , 93-96 ; limits of , 10 9 Males: disorderly, 2-3 , 21-28, 31, 42-44 , 51-52 , 6566, 69 , 71-72,109-10,156,170-71,175-77 ; order i n th e rank s of , 2 , 23-24, 31, 50, 76, 104-5, n8» 134,154-55,158,167,171-73 ; an d reason, 18 , 23; rivalry, 21 , 28; and sociability , 40,107,109,160 Manhood, 2-3 , 6, 123 ; aristocratic, 12-13 , 15-16, 29, 52,110-12,121,161 ; the bette r sort , 4 , 25, 46,102,104-6,110-13,115,119-20,122,124, 128,130,141,155,157; blac k exception s to , 68; and blood , 44-47 , 50-51 ; and citizenship , 2-3, 16,18, 20 ; consensual norm s of , 15-16 , 28-29, 31, 40-41, 46 , 52 , 72, 76, 96,128,158,163, 167; and deference , 42 , 47, 50,139-40,143 , 150,155,160; an d famil y rule , 5 , 7-8,10, 26 27, 50 , 81-82; and famil y status , 4,15-16, 84 , 87; and fraternity , 39-43 , 50, 52; heroic, 4 , 50, 103,129,133-37, x 39> i44-46> H8 ; and immor tality, 29 , 33, 35, 45, 81, 84, 88,114,121,16367,169; versus individualism , 159-63 ; international norm s of , 161 ; and leadership , 42,

Keillor, Garrison , 169-7 0 Kendal, Samuel , 138 Kent, James, 10 6 Kerber, Linda , 1,17,19,10 0 Ketcham, Ralph , 13 2 Kimmel, Michael , 12,1 7 Knox, Genera l Henry , 12 6 Lakoff, Sanford , 15 9 Langdon, Samuel , 138-3 9 Langguth, A. J., 6 9 Lathrop, Joseph, 10 1 Laurens, Henry , 96,12 4 Laurens, John, 96,11 3 Leadership, 46,112,128,155,173,175-77 ; active , 132; characteristics of , 141,150 ; and fame , 122 , 124; and foreig n policy , 151-54 ; and law , 128, 143-46; legitimacy, 31 , 47 , 99,119-20; nee d for, 44,103-6,131 ; and politica l fatherhood , 137-39; prerogative, 47,146,150,157,170-71 ; and publi c opinion , 111-12,143-46 ; and sym bolic politics, 147-50 . See also Fathers; He roes; Manhood; Natura l aristocracy ; Preroga tive Lee, Genera l Charles , 77, 113 Leland, John, 3 2 Lerner, Gerda , 3 2

Locke, John, 8-9 , n , 18 , 32, 36,54,145,16 5 Lockridge, Kenneth , 10- n Lownes, Caleb , 39

Index I 23 5 44-47,50; an d liberty , 30-31 , 33-35, 38-41, 43; and militar y service, 30-31 , 69-73,160-61; and nationhood , 47-50 ; in oppositio n t o slavery, 20 , 31, 76 ; in oppositio n t o woman hood, 1-3,16-22 , 31, 50, j6,162,174; i n op position t o youth, 20-21 , 58-59 , 76; and pro creation, 21-22 , 31-32, 35-37, 44, 47-51, 96 , 103,105,135,139,142-43,153-55,159,162-67, 171-73,175-77; and property , 36-37 ; republican, 13-16 , 29, 52 , 82,121,161; and reputa tion, 112-15 ; and respectability , 152-54 ; selfmade, 14-16 , 29, 52, 76, 86,109,121,158,161; and self-restraint , 30-31 , 50,158 ; and self-sac rifice, 45-47 , 50 , 89, 97,159-61,169-70,172 ; and space , 36-39, 47, 50 , 52, 88; and time , 35, 39, 47, 50 , 52, 88; unifying thread s of , 162-63 ; and womanhood , 19 , 21, 23,174-77. See also Effeminacy Manning, William , 71,118-19,126-2 7 Mao Tse-tung, 16 7 Marriage, 80-84 ; and adultery , 60-61 , 66, 81,131 ; and citizenship , 96-100 ; companionate ideal s of, 8-10,13-14 , 80-81 ; and divorce , 8 , 84; as duty, 2 , 5-6, 61 ; and fulfillment , 61 , 80-81; in centives to , 54 , 56, 83; and individualism , 14 ; and mal e se x right, 63,100,105 ; and prop erty, 6 ; taming effec t of , 6-8,16 , 21 , 27, 7980, 82-84,175-76 . See also Antimaritalism Mason, George , 14 , 84-85, 90, 92 , 97,109,11 3 Mason, Joh n Mitchell , 14 4 Mason, Sally , 88 Mather, Cotton , 16 2 Mather, Moses , 34 , 4 0 Maxey, Jonathan, 4 9 May, Henry , 12 7 Mayhew, Jonathan, 22 , 33 McClintock, Samuel , 106,13 8 McDonald, Forrest , n o McWilliams, Wilson Carey , 41,15 9 Militia, 39 , 47, 83, 92,100-102; an d corruption , 71; versus standin g armies , 55 , 70-71 Miller, Samuel , 4 8 Milton, John, 8 1 Miscegenation, 42 , 65-6 7 Misogyny, n , 14,19 , 27,105,17 4 Mitchell, Reid , 14 0 Mohl, Raymond , 6 5 Monroe, James, 108 Moore, Rober t an d Dougla s Gillette , 161,163, 169

Moore, Zephania h Swift , 138,14 1 Morris, Gouverneur , 122,12 4 Murray, Judith Sargent , 5-6,10,13 , 29 , 35,105, 112,114,120; and bachelors , 61 ; and educa tion, 57 ; and language , 49 ; and marriage , 80 81; and politica l patriarchy , 138 ; and women , 16, 49-50,130,17 4 Myerhoff, Barbara , 168-6 9 Nash, Gary , 101 Natural aristocracy , 115-19,12 3 Newburgh Addresses , 4 6 Norton, Mar y Beth , 61 , 84,113,140 Noyes, Mar y Fish , 6 , 81-8 2 O'Brien, Mary , 165-66 "Officer o f the Lat e Continenta l Army, " 9 1 "Old Stat e Soldier," 4 8 Order o f Odd Fellows , 16 7 Osgood, David , 12 7 Otis, James, Jr., 9 , 24 , 30, 40, 7 4 Paine, Thomas, 3,107,151 ; gender metaphors , 20; and generationa l change , 95-96 ; on lib erty, 30 , 91, 93; and property , 85 ; versus red coats, 70 ; and self-restraint , 30 ; and war , 40 41, 92 ; and women , 9 , 60,130,13 4 Parsons, Theophilus, 18,11 4 Pateman, Carole , 17-18 , 21, 27, 32,130,164,17 4 Patriarchal rage , 11, 27 Patriarchy, 81-82 , 96, 99-100,105,120,155,157 , 161,165-67,167,173-77; blac k exception s to , 68; corruption of , 52,140 ; defense of , 19 , 47, 51, 79-80; destabilization of , 8-n , 22 ; an d hegemony, 137-43 ; language of , 139-40 ; revol t against, 137 ; traditional, 2 , 5-8,15-16 , 27 , 29, 52, 82,130,134-3 5 Paupers, 6 5 Payson, Phillips , 70,109,122,13 7 Pendleton, Edmund , 9 7 Penn, William, 6 3 Perkins, John, 12 , i n "Philanthrop," 14 0 Philips, Josiah, 13 7 Pickering, Timothy, 9 9 Pinckney, Charles , 115 Pinckney, Charle s Cotesworth , 8 6 Pitkin, Hanna , 16 Pitt, William, 15 4 Plato, 94,131,13 4

236 I Index Pleck, Joseph, 157 "Plough Jogger," 8 8 Plutarch, 131 Pocock, J. G . A., 25 "Preceptor," 92 , n o Prerogative, 170 ; English histor y of , 145 ; in for eign policy , 153-54 ; manly, 45,151 ; patriar chal, 2 , 27,166; political, 29 , 46-47,121,129, 131-37,145-46,157; roya l an d parliamentary , 27,131-32. See also Heroes; Leadershi p Primogeniture, 85-8 6 Proclamation o f Neutrality, 121,134-35 , J 43> x53 Prynne, William, 5 5 Pugh, David , 1 7 Punishments, 73-75 ; banishment, 75,107 ; capi tal, 63-64 , 68 , 73; corporal, 64 ; emasculation , 24, 73-74 ; humiliation, 74-75,107 ; imprison ment, 63 , 74; isolation, 74 ; rehabilitation , 74-75 Quarrier, Samuel , 7 4 Quincy, Josiah, 6 2 Race war, 68-6 9 Ramsay, David , 20 , 24 , 41, 62, 77, 86, 99,106-8, 121,124,132

Randolph, Edmund , 77,112,128,135,14 5 Rape, 55 , 62-63, 66 > 69-7 0 Redcoats, 54-56 , 62, 69-70, 8 2 Reed, Joseph, 132 Refinement, 12,110-12,12 0 "Republican," 153 Republicanism, 14 , 26-27 Reynolds, Maria , 6 0 Rice, David , 66 Robbins, Caroline , 14 Robinson, John, 7 Rogin, Michael , 17,16 2 Rotation Schemes , 142 Rotundo, E . Anthony, 5,17,156,159,17 4 Rush, Benjamin , 59 , 61, 68, 71, 98,101; an d cap ital punishment , 73-7 5 Rush, Jacob, 6 0 Saar, Doree n Alvarez , 65-6 6 Sabo, Don , 16 8 Sandys, Si r Edwin, 5 6 Schmitt, Gary , 4 6 Schochet, Gordon , 9 Schuyler, Elizabeth , 8 0

Separate spheres , n Sex: black hypersexuality, 67-68 ; as conquest , 58; and crime , 62-64 ; dangers of , 19 , 53, 59, 61; incest, 66; and marriage , 6,54 , 64 , 83-84; and natality , 51 ; premarital, 57 , 60; same-se x relationships, 63-64 ; and self-discipline , 62 64; an d soldiers , 55 ; subversiveness of , 5-6 , 27; and women , 51 . See also Rape Sexual contract , 17,17 4 Shaftesbury, Thir d Ear l o f (Anthon y Ashle y Cooper), 5 4 Shays's Rebellion , 44-46 , 95,12 6 Sherman, Roger , 14 2 Sherwood, Samuel , 4 0 Shklar, Judith, 17 , 20, 38,146-4 7 Shuffelton, Frank , 67 Shute, Daniel , 34,12 2 Sidney, Algernon, 8 Silliman, Mar y Fis h Noyes . See Noyes, Mar y Fish Slaveholders, 66-6 9 Slavery, 6 , 42, 67,15 6 Slaves, 37, 66-69, 7 1- $ ee a ^s0 African-America n males Smalley, John, 14 0 Smith, Melancton , 102,11 6 Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll , 17 Sons, 90,161 ; autonom y of , 93-94 ; education of , 54, 87-91 ; and inheritance , 85-87 ; and mili tary service, 92-9 3 Stamp Act, 22 , 24, 4 0 Standing armies , 54-55 , 70-72, 75. See also Militia Stansell, Christine , 17-1 8 Stevens, John, 112,120,12 3 Stiles, Ezra , 4 4 Stockton, Annis Boudinot , 10,115,13 8 Stockton, Julia, 6 1 Stone, Lawrence , 9 Stone, Timothy, 138 Symbolic politics , 147-5 0 Taylor, John, 20 , 37, 67-6 9 Thacher, Peter , 8 8 Thatcher, Oxenbridge , 40,13 2 Thayer, John, 14 8 Thorne, Barrie , 156-5 7 Toland, John, 55-5 6 Trenchard, John, 54-5 5 Tucker, John, 47,14 1

Index I Tyler, Royall , 13,57,103- 4 Tyrrell, James, 8 Ulrich, Laure l Thatcher, 7 , 71 Universal Militar y Training, 16 0 U.S. Constitution , 31 , 42 , 48, 72, 91, 94, 98-99 , 109,117-18,121,126,129,133-36,138,141,153, 170-73 U.S. Hous e o f Representatives, 98 U.S. presidency , 98-99 ; and foreig n policy , 15354 U.S. Senate , 38, 98,10 0 Wadsworth, Jeremiah, 143,14 7 Wait, Thomas, 117 Wales, Samuel, 112,14 4 Warren, Joseph, 4 1 Warren, Merc y Otis , 19, 33, 91,106,120,124, 126; and language , 48-49; and prerogative , 132,146; and soldiers , 69-7 0 Warren, Winslow, 8 9 Washington, George , 31 , 48 , 73, 76, 77 , 94,119, 125,127; and agriculture , 36 ; and civility , 91, 109, i n, 127,168 ; against disorder , 24-25 , 46; and economi c opportunity , 6 ; and fame , 12122,124; and families , 32-33 , 83, 93; as a fathe r figure, 138-39 ; and foreig n policy , 134-35, 15I» 153; and th e frontier , 65-66 ; and leadership , 130,132-33,135,142,144,147-48,170; an d marriage, 81 ; an d militias , 71,101; and prop erty, 37; and reputation , 13 , 46,113-14,117-19; and self-discipline , 30-31 ; and sex , 57-58 , 60, 83; and soldiers , 45; on Shays' s Rebellion , 44 ; and war , 40-4 1 Washington, Lund , 113 Washington, Martha , 8 3

23 7

Webster, Noah , 21 , 23, 27, 43, 49, 60 , 77 , 84, 87, 109-10,112,127,149,175; an d th e natura l aristocracy, 115,118,138,14 2 Webster, Pelatiah , 108,11 5 Weigley, Russell , 71 West, Samuel , 9 7 Whiskey rebels , 75,14 8 Williams, Daniel , 6 8 Williams, Raymond , 2 8 Williams, Samuel , 19 , 84 Wills, Garry , 37,12 1 Wilson, James, 38, 99,116,13 8 Wilson, Woodrow , 172-7 3 Winthrop, James, 42,5 2 Winthrop, John, 6 4 Witherspoon, John , 2 , 40-41, 67, 106 Withington, An n Fairfax , 105,10 7 Wolin, Sheldon , 33 Wollstonecraft, Mary , 17 4 Women: an d citizenship , 99-100,130-31,153; domineering, 6-7,16-17 , 81 ; and disorder , 7 , 10,16-17,19-2.2, 47, 51 , 81,100,175-77; a n ( i education, 81-82,174 ; as family members , 7 , 15-16, 39, 43, 61; and historica l agency , 10 , 22; and historica l continuity , 166 ; and patrio tism, 26,51,174 ; political exclusio n of , 1 , 3, 18-19, 26-27, 3 I_32> 38-39, 43, 50,100,105,155, 174; in th e publi c sphere , 18 , 27, 49-50; an d reason, 18,174 ; rights of, 9,156,158,174 ; an d sex, 51, 59-60; and slavery , 66; Spartan , 35 Wood, Gordon , 14 , 23,115,126,137,17 1 Workman, Benjamin , 7 2 Wortman, Tunis , 67,11 4 Yazawa, Melvin, 8 7 Young Men's Christia n Association , 16 7

About the Author

Mark E. Kann, Professo r o f Political Science at the University of Southern California , hold s th e US C Associates Chai r i n Socia l Science . H e has taught in the Gender Studies Program and the American Studies and Ethnicity Program as well as in the Department of Political Science. He is the recipient of numerous teaching awards. Professor Kan n has authored an d edited seven books and dozens of academic articles. His prior book was On the Man Question: Gender and Civic Virtue in America (1991). In addition to teaching and research, Kann has been editor of the interdisciplinary journal Humanities in Society, writte n monthl y politica l commen tary fo r th e Lo s Angeles Herald Examiner, and serve d a s Associate Dea n o f Graduate Studie s a t th e Universit y o f Souther n California . H e receive d hi s Ph.D. from th e University of Wisconsin-Madison i n 1975.

238