¹ Pocock, J. G. A., “Virtue and Commerce in the Eighteenth Century”, Journal of Interdisciplinary History 3, (1972), 119–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Pocock, , The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton, 1975)Google Scholar; Banning, Lance, The Jeffersonian Persuasion: Evolution of a Party Ideology (Ithaca, 1978)Google Scholar. See also the extremely interesting essay by Murrin, John, “The Great Inversion, or Court versus Country: A Comparison of the Revolution Settlements in England (1688–1721) and America (1776–1816),” in Pocock, (ed.), Three British Revolutions: 1641, 1688, 1776 (Princeton, 1980), pp. 368–453Google Scholar, and Berthoff, Rowland, “Independence and Attachment, Virtue and Interest: From Republican Citizen to Free Enterpriser, 1787–1837,” in Bushman, Richard L. et al. (eds), Uprooted Americans: Essays to Honor Oscar Handlin (Boston, 1979), pp. 97–124Google Scholar. Two good historiographical articles by Shalhope, Richard E. are “Towards a Republican Synthesis: the Emergence of an Understanding of Republicanism in American Historiography”, William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser. 29 (1972), 49–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “Republicanism and Early American Historiography”, ibid.39 (1982), 334–56.

² Professor Appleby's earlier work includes Economic Thought and Ideology in Seventeenth– Century England (Princeton, 1978)Google Scholar, “Liberalism and the American Revolution”, New England Quarterly, 49 (1976), 3–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar, “The Social Origins of American Revolutionary Ideology”, Journal of American History, 64 (1978), 935–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar, “What is Still American in the Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson”, William and Mary Quarterly, 39 (1982), 287–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Some of the points in Capitalism and a New Social Order are, of course, anticipated in these writings.

³ Perhaps because of limitations of space Professor Appleby does not always dispose of the evidence presented by her “opponents”. In this essay I have tried to assess that evidence together with that which she and other scholars have presented in order to offer some suggestions about the Current State of our knowledge on this subject.

⁴ Capitalism and a New Social Order, pp. 79, 81, 86, 4, 14.

⁵ Ibid. pp. 59, 94. See also p. 66.

⁶ Ellis, Richard E., The Jeffersonian Crisis: Courts and Politics in the Young Republic (N.Y., 1971), pp. 19–24Google Scholar.

⁷ McCoy, Drew R., The Elusive Republic: Political Economy in Jeffersonian America (Chapel Hill, 1980)Google Scholar; Banning, , Jeffersonian Persuasion, p. 193Google Scholar; Appleby, , Capitalism and a New Social Order, p. 80Google Scholar.

⁸ Banning, , Jeffersonian Persuasion, p. 24Google Scholar; Pocock, , Machiavellian Moment, pp. 77, 388Google Scholar, see also pp. 205, 297 (on, Machiavelli and Giannotti).

⁹ Zvesper, John, Political Philosophy and Rhetoric, A Study of the Origins of American Party Politics (Cambridge, 1977), p. 40Google Scholar.

¹⁰ McCoy, , Elusive Republic, pp. 120–21, 131Google Scholar. McCoy agrees that Jefferson, except towards the end of his life, was generally optimistic – ibid. p. 249.

¹¹ These changes of mood are apparent in Taylor, 's Inquiry into the Principles and Policy of the Government of the United States (London, 1950)Google Scholar, a work written over a period of many years. Taylor ends on a more pessimistic note than he begins on.

¹² Appleby, , Capitalism and a New Social Order, p. 15Google Scholar.

¹³ Zvesper, , Political Philosophy, pp. 103, 14, 104Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Taylor, , Inquiry, pp. 490, 362, passimGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵ This is testimony to the debt of all scholars to Gordon Wood's Creation of the American Republic (Chapel Hill. 1969.)Google Scholar

¹⁶ Zvesper, , Politial Philosophy, pp. 45–47Google Scholar. The social and political ideals of the Federalists were, of course, starkly different from those of Taylor. I am not seeking to minimize the ideological distance between Federalism and radical Jeffersonianism.

¹⁷ Appleby, , Capitalism and a New Social Order, p. 17Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Banning, passim: Pocock, , Machiavellian Moment, p. 473Google Scholar. Taylor's suspicion of “natural aristocracy” is evident in his Inquiry, pp. 223–24. Jefferson, of course, though keen to place the “natural aristoi” in government, opposed Adams' (and Harrington's) insistence that they be given a separatechamber. See Jefferson's famous letter to Adams of 28 Oct. 1813.

¹⁹ McCoy, , Elusive Republic, pp. 114–24, 174, 181–82Google Scholar; Taylor, Inquiry, passim.

²⁰ McCoy has brought out the fundamental difference between household manufactures, which Republicans welcomed, and the more modern manufacturing establishments employing wage labour, which they opposed fiercely. This is in fact the distinction between pre-capitalist and capitalist production, as I have defined the term, and further testifies to the centrality of that distinction in Republican thinking.

²¹ See the fascinating analysis in de Ste Croix, G.E.M.'s The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World (London, 1983), pp. 179–204Google Scholar.

²² McCoy, , Elusive Republic, p. 10Google Scholar.

²³ Buel, Richard Jr, Securing the Revolution: Ideology in American Politics, 1789–1815 (Ithaca, 1972), pp. 52, 76Google Scholar.

²⁴ Morgan, Edmund S., American Slavery, American Freedom, The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia (N.Y., 1975), pp. 364, 380Google Scholar. For a somewhat different view of Virginia at this time see Isaac, Rhys, The Transformation of Virginia, 1740–1780 (Chapel Hill, 1982)Google Scholar.

²⁵ To put it rather differently, I am suggesting that the slaveholders were the dominant class in American politics and their enthusiasm for, or at least acquiescence in, the process of democratization made that process unusually smooth and harmonious. The price, of course, was that slavery was fixed even more firmly upon American society. See Murrin, “Great Inversion,” p. 426. Referring to the debates over the constitution, Howard A. Ohline claims that “slavery and the fears of slaveholders acted to assure a more democratic political system for white men”: Ohline, , “Republicanism and Slavery: Origins of the Three-Fifths Clause in the United States Constitution,” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Ser. 28 (1971), 562–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The extent of Republican dominance in the South in the 1790s is suggested in Mary P. Ryan, “Party Formation in the United States Congress: A Quantitative Analysis,” ibid.28 (1971) 523–42, though it must be added that Rudolph M. Bell, Party and Faction in American Politics: The House of Representatives 1789–1801 seeks to qualify this thesis somewhat.

²⁶ Ste Croix, Class Struggle, passim. As many writers have shown, the classical ideal of the independent citizen was important in many cultures at many times. In the United States its dominance may perhaps be attributed to a combination of the English libertarian heritage and the social and political power of the slaveholding class.

²⁷ On the question of the continuity of Republican ideology into the Jacksonian era see Ashworth, John, “Agrarians” and “Aristocrats”: Party Political Ideology in the United States, 1837–1846 (London, 1983)Google Scholar.