| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 88.3

You have not been recognized as a subscriber to JAH online. About 243 words from this article are provided below; about 390 words remain.

If you are a individual member of the Organization of American Historians, you may:: • login here if you have already registered for online access.; • Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time.
If you are not a member of the Organization of American Historians, you can:: • Join the OAH and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the Journal of American History.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two-hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the Journal of American History (86.1-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the Journal of American History.
Instititutions can:: • Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.

| Book Review | The Journal of American History, 88.3 | The History Cooperative

Book Review

The Counterrevolution of Slavery: Politics and Ideology in Antebellum South Carolina. By Manisha Sinha. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000. xvi, 362 pp. Cloth, $55.00, ISBN 0-8078-2571-9. Paper, $19.95, ISBN 0-8078-4884-0.)

Manisha Sinha's argument, reduced to essentials, is this: South Carolina's planter politicians (her term) were archconservatives who defended slavery and distrusted democracy; they controlled the politics of the state and were at the fore in sectional controversies; the eventual secession of eleven southern states validated their leadership and the southern separatist ideology that they had formulated long before 1860–1861; therefore secession was an elite counterrevolution against the rising tide of abolitionism and egalitarianism in the Atlantic world, and any analysis to the contrary is wrong. 1

A single-volume account of the political thoughts and actions of the South Carolina gentry during the state's main sectional bouts is valuable and welcome, but Sinha unfortunately overstates her contributions. Her colleagues in southern history already know that Carolinians were ahead of other white southerners in embracing proslavery ideology and in elaborating theories of southern rights and that South Carolina played a provocative role in the sectional conflict. Familiar characters, incidents, and quotations appear throughout the book; it could hardly be otherwise, given the huge literature on South Carolina and antebellum politics. Sinha, though, does not display much regard for the efforts of her scholarly predecessors and is particularly dismissive of what she calls "the republican school of southern political historians." . . .

There are about 390 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.