Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation (review)

Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation . By Joseph J. Ellis. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2000; pp. xi + 288. $26.00.

With Founding Brothers, Joseph Ellis reaffirms his place among U.S. historians who approach their subject matter with an appreciation for the rhetorical dimensions of the nation's early history. Like Bernard Bailyn, Pauline Maier, Jack Rakove, Gordon Wood, and others, Ellis is a leading historian of this period who cogently appreciates how public discourse actuated the controversies of the early republic. In this analysis of key episodes of the 1790s, Ellis explores how "the revolutionary generation found a way to contain the explosive energies of the debate in the form of an ongoing argument or dialogue that was eventually institutionalized and rendered safe by the creation of political parties" (15).

The title reflects Ellis's offer of "a polite argument against the scholarly grain" (12). Believing that the history of the revolution and the early republic is essentially political, Ellis concludes that the central players in this history, the "political leaders as the center of the national story," warrant our attention. They, Ellis continues, formed and shaped national institutions, "collaborated and collided with one another" publicly and privately, and held access to power that enabled them to impact significantly the nation then and now. Eschewing a "pure republicanism" (or Jeffersonian) explanation or a nationalist (or Hamiltonian) perspective, Ellis seeks to avoid recapitulation of the ideological battle that marks much of contemporary historiography on the late eighteenth century in the United States. He succeeds in this effort, transcending the partisan pleading cycle. Displaying a keen reading of the rhetorical foundation of early U.S. politics, Ellis demonstrates that ongoing debate over who we are, not supposed resolutions of this debate, is the defining characteristic of national identity. For example, it is not the Declaration of Independence's proposition of equality to which Lincoln referred that is essential, but that "[W]e are really founded on an argument about what that proposition means" (17).

The chapters examine a series of episodes of rhetorical and historical significance, starting with the duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. Their fates were inexorable, Ellis claims, given the way in which the two elevated their personal acrimony from private invective to Hamilton's death. Through analysis of the letters the two men exchanged, Ellis illustrates how Hamilton "raised the rhetorical stakes with his dismissive tone and gratuitously defiant counterthreat" in response to Burr's initial call for an apology (33).

Ellis's text moves back in time as he examines the complex negotiations that culminated in congressional approval of Hamilton's plan for federal assumption of the states' war debts. An advocate of a strong federal government with broad economic powers, Hamilton found himself at odds with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. In typical Madisonian fashion, Ellis explains, the Virginian offered a "vintage . . . performance: utterly reasonable, flawlessly logical, disarmingly temperate" in Congress as he explained his position on payment of war debts. It was a difficult position to maintain, as Madison's fellow Virginians invoked "the radical rhetoric of the 1760s and 1770s" in their opposition to Hamilton. It was Madison, the "acknowledged master of the inoffensive argument," of parliamentary procedure, and of the principles of governance, whom Ellis credits for crafting a prudent compromise despite his personal opposition to Hamilton's plan. The Compromise of 1790, in which Virginia dropped its attacks in exchange for placement of the new capital along the Potomac River, was the product of the "great collaboration" between Madison and Jefferson, who would later provide the "rhetorical foundation" for the new nation (80).

A rhetorically textured reading of the levels of public discourse on slavery in the 1790s comprises the third chapter. Ellis opens by reminding readers of often forgotten petitions from Pennsylvanian Quakers and from Benjamin Franklin calling upon Congress to take action against slavery and the slave trade. These petitions ignited fierce debate within Congress, calling forth lines of argument that Ellis...