An Interview with the Editors of the *Journal of the Early Republic*

JEROver at The Panorama, Will Mackintosh interviews Andy Shankman and David Waldstreicher, the new editors of the Journal of the Early Republic.

Here is a taste:

Will: What are some of your plans for your editorial tenure at the Journal of the Early Republic?

Andy: Above all stewardship (which is an idea I’ve stolen from David) because I think the journal is in such great shape and has had such an impressive run of editors. So above all, I hope to do no harm. I’d like to involve the SHEAR community in helping us to think about special issues on topics that a large portion of our readers would like to see. For me, the core mission of the journal is to publish excellent original research drawn primarily from primary sources. But I also feel that we’ve never produced more high-quality scholarship at a greater (even overwhelming) rate than we are right now. I want to think about ways the JER might help us to attempt some broad, synthetic thinking, and perhaps get scholars of different generations and scholarly focuses talking to each other. So many people are asking so many critical questions now about the nation’s origins—about race and slavery, gender relations, the role and nature of the state at all levels, about how all of that relates to capitalism and political economy, about the need to bring together historiographies about institutions, cultural and social relations and constructions, political though,t etc., scholarships that haven’t always engaged with each other as much as they might—it’s a tremendously exciting time to be a student of the early American republic, and I want to think about ways in which the JER can continue to capture and convey that excitement.

David: Doug Bradburn buttonholed me with this same question at SHEAR in Baltimore when I took over in 2012 and I answered in one word: stewardship. (I’m still wondering if he was disappointed.) The job of the editor is to get the best possible work in all subfields into the journal. Articles should be timely in the sense of speaking to matters of current interest to historians, but it is even more important that articles should be built to last a long time, to be resources for historians in all fields and for others who will be interested in we know not what in 10 or 20 or 50 years (witness the renewed fascination with aspects of economic and diplomatic history, utterly unpredicted when I was in grad school). Sooner or later, anything may become timely again. Journal editing is about creating and spreading brand new discoveries and interpretations but also about archiving original research it so it is there to be more easily found later when it is needed. But perhaps most of all, regardless of whether one focuses on the short or long term of scholarship in our field, the number one job of the editors is to draw on whatever expertise we can muster, including especially the readers who graciously review manuscripts for us, to make every piece that passes through our hands (or now, screens) better whether we publish it or not.

Read the entire interview here.

Friendship in Early America

JSHI just learned that the theme of the recent issue of the Journal of Social History is “Friendship in Early America.”

Here is the table of contents:

Janet Moore Lindman, “Histories of Friendship in Early America: An Introduction”

Gregory Smithers, “‘Our Hands and Hearts are Joined Together’: Friendship, Colonialism, and the Cherokee People in Early America”

Shelby Balik, “‘Dear Christian Friends’: Charity Bryant, Sylvia Drake, and the Making of a Spiritual Network”

Thomas Balcerski, “‘A Work of Friendship’: Nathaniel Hawthorne, Franklin Pierce, and the Politics of Enmity in the Civil War Era”

Janet Moore Lindman, “‘This Union of the Soul’: Spiritual Friendship among Early American Protestants”

Nik Ribianszky, “‘Tell Them that My Dayly Thoughts are with Them as Though I was Amidst Them All”: Friendship among Property-Owning Free People of Color in Nineteenth-Century Natchez, Mississippi.

Edmund Morgan Wins Junto March Madness

Junto MarchA few years ago Morgan’s book American Slavery/American Freedom won the Junto March Madness tournament devoted to the best books in early American history.

This year Morgan’s 1972 “Slavery and Freedom: The American Paradox” won the best article in early American history.  Morgan defeated Jill Lepore’s “Historians Who Love to Much: Reflections on Microhistory and Biography” in the final match.

Early American historians still love Edmund Morgan!

Let’s see what the good folks of the Junto come up with for next year’s March Madness. How about best history blogs or best books on Philip Vickers Fithian?

The New Issue of *New Jersey Studies* is Here

If you are interested in New Jersey history you should check out New Jersey Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal.  It is an online peer reviewed journal of New Jersey studies edited by Melissa Ziobro at Monmouth University.  Jonathan Mercantini of Kean University serves as the book review editor.

Here is the table of contents from the Spring 2016 edition.  There is some really good stuff here.

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

Winter 2016 Letter from the Editor
Melissa Ziobro

TALKS

Jonathan Lurie
1-10
Holly Metz
11-22

ARTICLES

Christopher M. Bellitto
23-49
Robert W. Craig
50-76
Richard L. Porter
77-119
Si Sheppard
120-151
Barbara M. Tucker
152-184

NJSAA PAPERS

Jonathan D. Cohen
185-212

DOCUMENTS + ARTIFACTS

Maxine N. Lurie
213-223

TEACHING NEW JERSEY HISTORY

Timothy O’Shea
224-230

REVIEWS

Alan Delozier
231-233
Firth Haring Fabend
234-235
Larry A. Greene
236-238
Michelle Craig McDonald
239-242
Lucia McMahon
243-245
Karen Schnitzspahn
246-248
Janet Sheridan
249-252
Richard Veit
253-256

 

The Junto March Madness Tournament is Back

Junto MarchThis year, the good folks at The Junto blog are focusing their annual March Madness tournament on journal articles.  Head over to the Junto and nominate your three favorite early American history articles.

And don’t forget to nominate:

John Fea, “The Way of Improvement Leads Home: Philip Vickers Fithian’s Rural Enlightenment,” Journal of American History 90:2 (September 2003).

Let’s see how far the coining of the phrase “rural Enlightenment” can take us. As I have done in previous Junto tournaments, I am organizing my ground game.  I am hoping the readers of The Way of Improvement Leads Home blog will rise up from the grass roots and carry Fithian and the “rural Enlightenment” to 1). A spot in the tournament field and 2). at least a first round upset.  🙂

Here is how it works, from the Junto blog:

It’s the most wonderful time of the year here at The Junto, or the month of March Madness! As faithful readers will know, each year we engage in a spirited tournament of voting in some category related to early American history. Last year, it was primary sources. Find out what this year’s theme will be after the jump.

This time around, we’ve decided that our tournament will focus on journal articles. Here are our two big reasons for this decision: 1) for many of our students, articles are cheaper than books because they’re free. Articles become a way for students to get a taste of an author’s larger contribution and historiographical intervention. 2) Although we recognize that scholarly journals can and do pose access issues to non-academics, many journals are taking important steps to improve access, and we’re hoping that the tournament encourages further sharing of articles (on which, more soon!).

Nominations open today and close on Sunday at 5 p.m. EST. Check out the rules below and then add your nominations and seconds in the Comments section. Then, by the power of The Junto‘s bracketologists, we’ll put together tournament brackets, announce the brackets, and open it up for your votes in the very near future.

The Rules

1) Journal articles can be old or very recent, but should have appeared in a journal rather than an edited collection. If a journal article has been reprinted in an edited collection, however, please mention that in your nomination because it will make it easier for additional people to read it. As with last year, the point of this exercise is to create a giant list of sources–in this case, secondary sources–for research and teaching that encourage us all to think about access issues and how to be good historians.

2) All nominations must be made in the Comments section of this post.

3) If would be helpful if, in your nomination, you included one line about each of the articles you’re nominating. Do you use it for teaching? Did it make you rethink a particular historical moment? Tell us why you care about the article!

4) We ask that you nominate a maximum of three articles that have not yet been nominated. You may also “second” the nomination of three other articles that have already been nominated. If you were going to nominate articles already mentioned you may do so and they will be tallied as seconds.

5) Want to participate in extra nerding out on Twitter? Use the hashtag #JuntoMM16 (because, er, #JMM16 has been taken over by STEM people).

NB: Essentially, each voter can nominate and second up to six articles but only three can be new nominations. Given the number of comments posted last year, please state explicitly which of your articles count as nominations, and which count as seconds. (To see if one of your choices has already been nominated, go to Edit->Find in your browser and type in the name of the primary source.)

The Disclaimer

Like last year’s tournament, this is all meant to be taken in a spirit of fun. This tournament is not meant to bestow any kind of value judgment on individual works. If anything, it may be a reflection of the “favorite” articles of our readers; but that should not be thought of as implying that it reflects what our readers or this blog think is the “best” article. Last year’s competition inspired lots of interesting and entertaining conversations, and this year we’re hoping to hear from even more of you. We’ll be interspersing the tournament, and following it up, with reflections on articles and their place in the historical profession. Please feel free to join in in the comments, or to use the Twitter hashtag.

The New *Journal of the Early Republic* is Here

Winter 2015:

ARTICLES
Reassessing Responses to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions:
New Evidence from the Tennessee and Georgia Resolutions and from Other States
WENDELL BIRD

A ‘‘Voice of Benevolence from the Western Wilderness’’: The Politics of Native Philanthropy in the Trans-Mississippi West
ANELISE HANSON SHROUT

Trick or Constitutional Treaty?: The Jay Treaty and the Quarrel over the Diplomatic Separation of Powers
AMANDA C. DEMMER

‘‘The Music of a well tun’d State’’: ‘‘The Star Spangled Banner’’ and the Development of a Federalist Musical Tradition\
WILLIAM COLEMAN

EDITOR’ PAGE

REVIEW ESSAY
Digitizing Dolley, and Eliza and Harriott Pinckney
MARY CARROLL JOHANSON

REVIEWS
Saunt, West of the Revolution: An Uncommon History of 1776
PAUL W. MAPP

Miller, Dangerous Guests: Enemy Captives and Revolutionary Communities during the War for Independence
FRIEDERIKE BAER

Nelson, The Royalist Revolution: Monarchy and the American Founding
ROBERT W. T. MARTIN

Glover, Founders as Fathers: The Private Lives and Politics of the American Revolutionaries
CHARLENE BOYER LEWIS

Smith, Robert Morris’s Folly: The Architectural and Financial Failures of an American Founder
GABRIELLE M. LANIER

Connors, Ingenious Machinists: Two Inventive Lives from the American Industrial Revolution
ROBERT MARTELLO

Peart, Era of Experimentation: American Political Practices in the Early Republic
ANDREW SHANKMAN

Criblez, Parading Patriotism: Independence Day Celebrations in the Urban Midwest, 1826–1876
KELLY WENIG

Roth, Gender and Race in Antebellum Popular Culture
HOLLY M. KENT

Chambers, The Weston Sisters: An American Abolitionist Family
BETH A. SALERNO

Demos, The Heathen School: A Story of Hope and Betrayal in the Age of the Early Republic
KARIANN AKEMI YOKOTA

Scott and He´brard, Freedom Papers: An Atlantic Odyssey in the Age of Emancipation
CHRISTOPHER HODSON

The New *Early American Studies* is Here

Volume 13:4, Fall 2015  Table of Contents:

Public Sales and Public Values in Eighteenth-Century North America
Ellen Hartigan-O’Connor 


‘‘Getting into a Little Business’’: Margaret Hill Morris and Women’s Medical Entrepreneurship during the American Revolution
Susan Brandt

Agents at Home: Wives, Lawyers, and Financial Competence in Eighteenth-Century New England Port Cities
Sara T. Damiano 

‘‘For Lucre of Gain and in Contempt of the Laws’’: Itinerant Traders and the Politics of Mobility in the Eighteenth-Century Mid-AtlanticRobert J. Gamble

Merchant and Plebeian Commercial Knowledge in Montreal and Quebec, 1760–1820Nancy Christie

Building and Outfitting Ships in Colonial BostonSteven J. J. Pitt

Maritime Labor, Economic Regulation, and the Spoils of Atlantic Commerce in Early PhiladelphiaSimon Finger

‘‘By Measures Taken of Men’’: Clothing the Classes in William Carlin’s Alexandria, 1763–1782
Katherine Egner Gruber

The New Issue of "The Journal of the Early American Republic* Is Here

ARTICLES

An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations
John Lauritz Larson

The View from Piqua Agency: The War of 1812, the White River Delawares, and the Origins of Indian Removal
Karim M. Tiro

A Crisis of Legitimacy: Defining the Boundaries of Kinship in the Low Country during the Early Republic
Adam Wolkoff

Of Salt Mountains, Prairie Dogs, and Horned Frogs: The Louisiana Purchase and the Evolution of Federalist Satire 1803–1812
David Dzurec

Saying ‘‘No’’ to the State 
Staughton Lynd

What is the Most Influential History Journal in the English Language?

Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles. Created by University of California, San Diego physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars. The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.
Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, though it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.
Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused (and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research.
– See more at: http://hnn.us/article/153862#sthash.RYc2l0FW.dpuf

Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles. Created by University of California, San Diego physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars. The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.
Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, though it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.
Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused (and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research.
– See more at: http://hnn.us/article/153862#sthash.RYc2l0FW.dpuf

Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles. Created by University of California, San Diego physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars. The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.
Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, though it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.
Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused (and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research.
– See more at: http://hnn.us/article/153862#sthash.RYc2l0FW.dpuf
Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles. Created by University of California, San Diego physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars. The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.
Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, though it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.
Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused (and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research.
– See more at: http://hnn.us/article/153862#sthash.RYc2l0FW.dpuf

Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles. Created by University of California, San Diego physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars. The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.
Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, though it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.
Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused (and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research.
– See more at: http://hnn.us/article/153862#sthash.RYc2l0FW.dpuf
Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles. Created by University of California, San Diego physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars. The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.
Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, though it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.
Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused (and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research.
– See more at: http://hnn.us/article/153862#sthash.RYc2l0FW.dpuf

When I first saw this question posed by History News Network I immediately thought the most influential history journal would be The American Historical Review (AHR) followed closely by the The Journal of American History (JAH).

I could not have been more wrong.  The AHR finished fourth and the JAH finished fifteenth.

The most influential journal is actually The Journal of Economic History followed by The Economic History Review and Journal of Latin American Studies.

Here is a taste of the explanation behind the rankings:

Google Scholar, Google’s specialized search engine for scholarly literature, uses the h-index to measure the impact of scholarly articles.  Created by the University of California, San Diego, physicist Jorge E. Hirsch in 2005, the h-index is one of several attempts to quantify the productivity and quality of scholars.  The index is a relatively simple measurement, using only the most highly-cited articles in its formulation.

Though designed to rank the contributions of individual scientists, the h-index can also be applied to researchers and publications, and according to Professor Hirsch the index will also give reasonably accurate rankings for arts and humanities journals, thought it will be less reliable for individual researchers given the book-driven nature of the discipline.

Though the top two history journals are both economics-focused(and the Journal of Economic History is noted for its cliometric approach), Hirsch says that the h-index does not favor quantitative over non-quantitative research. 

Interesting.

Springsteen Thursday: BOSS: The Biannual Online-Journal of Springsteen Studies

I just learned about this journal today.  Here is a summary:

BOSS: The Biannual Online-Journal of Springsteen Studies is a new open access academic journal that publishes peer-reviewed essays pertaining to Bruce Springsteen. Springsteen’s immense body of work and remarkable musical career has inspired a recent outpouring of scholarly analysis. BOSS will create a scholarly space for Springsteen Studies in the contemporary academy. We seek to publish articles that examine the political, economic, and socio-cultural factors that have influenced Springsteen’s music and shaped its reception. The editors of BOSS welcome broad interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary approaches to Springsteen’s songwriting, performance, and fan community, as well as studies that conform to specific disciplinary perspectives.

Please submit articles between 15 and 25 pages that conform to The Chicago Manual of Style to Springsteenstudies@gmail.com by January 1st, 2014. Authors will be notified of acceptance by March. The first issue of BOSS will be published in June, 2014, which marks the thirtieth anniversary of the release of Born in the U.S.A

The journal is connected with The Friends of Bruce Springsteen Special Collection at Monmouth University in West Long Branch, NJ.