In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

In the summer of 1810, Charles Curryman, a self-described “old man,” took time from the demands of the small farm he rented to write a letter to the Lexington Kentucky Gazette in nearby Lexington. Curryman’s sons had recently returned from the local militia muster, telling stories not of marching and drilling but of speeches promising “great things” by candidates for the state assembly. The old farmer was even more surprised when his youngest boy said that “Mr. such and one, and he is a lawyer and a candidate, told my brother that he and you could vote, and so could every man above 21 years of age.” Not sure whether to believe his son’s story, Curryman attended the next muster to see for himself. Describing the day, Curryman wrote that soon after he arrived at the muster grounds, “Mr. Z. the friend of my candidate asked me to drink some grog, and took me to a Booth, and there I was saluted with a hearty shake of the hand from all the candidates, who seemed to be as much my friends as if they had known me all our lives.” A few minutes later the Curryman boys’ tale was confirmed: “The candidates began to speak, and they promised a great deal of good things to us people if we would elect them.” Following the speeches, Curryman joined a small crowd of his neighbors to mull over the candidates’ merits. Was so-and-so a true republican ? questioned one man. If he was, came a reply, we’d see him on more than just Election Day. Besides, added another, they all claim to be republicans and patriots when it’s vote-counting time. Curryman didn’t quite know what to make of this exchange and the events he had witnessed, but what he saw and heard captured his imagination and taught him about his “sacred and important” duty and right as a citizen to participate in the electoral process. Curryman’s exposure to the world of politics at a county militia muster was not an unusual event [ 66 ] , proponents of democr acy and partisanship proponents of democr acy and partisanship [ 67 ] in the early nineteenth century. Militia grounds became the schoolhouse where Americans learned to exercise their political rights and responsibilities. For more than six decades, citizen-soldiers contributed to Kentucky’s political development by accelerating the process of democratization and encouraging participation in partisan activities. The Revolution’s ideals of equality and independence had sown the seeds of democracy, but Americans needed to adapt to this new political environment just as their predecessors had adapted to the harsh opportunities of the American wilderness. Historian Ronald P. Formisano describes the early republic as a time of transition, during which colonial deferential politics gave way to the partisan free-for-all of the second party system. This transitional “deferential-participant” phase did not occur in a linear fashion; rather, it leapt ahead in fits and starts, finding the most fertile ground on the frontier, away from the time- and tradition-encrusted politics of the East. In places like Kentucky, on the boundary between settled familiarity and tentative anticipation, democracy flourished by mixing the East’s political ideals with the West’s social fluidity. Unaccustomed to the deferential politics of earlier generations, men on the frontier saw little reason to surrender their political voice to any man. But even on civilization’s edge, wealth still equaled power. How then, convinced of his right to equal participation and influence in the political process, did the country’s Charles Currymans challenge the emerging elite? Why did democracy take root and later grow into a thriving two-party system in Kentucky? At least part of the explanation lies with the region’s citizen-soldiers. Kentucky’s militiamen challenged and participated in the traditional political order in three significant ways. First, in the era of the enrolled militia, citizen-soldiers acted as proponents of and a vehicle for democratization . In the 1780s and 1790s, as Kentuckians moved to separate from Virginia and petition Congress for statehood, men whose political influence reached no further than their Election Day votes began to make themselves heard. They discovered that their enrolled militia companies provided a ready-made conduit into the political world because of their preexisting organization and pervasive presence throughout the state. Companies provided a way for the middle and lower classes to participate in politics and, with a unified voice...

Share