Single Annotation/Summary Assignment Summaries/annotations
This is where you should place your summaries and annotations. Just comment below.
Remember, before you can comment, you will need a WPMU login. See directions here.
26 Responses to “Single Annotation/Summary Assignment Summaries/annotations”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Christina Racanelli
Litt 2123
This article “The Forgotten Prophet” Tom Paine’s Cosmopolitanism and International Relations” by Thomas C. Walker is about Thomas Paine’s opinion on Democratic states. He beleived that every counrty or state should not have kings or anarchies. He beleived countries will have more peace if they are not run by kings. And that monarchies cause their own wars. Walker also talked about Paine’s ideas of free trade. He said that Paine beleived that if countries traded goods that were needed people would be less likely to go to war. Another topic discussed was how many people forget about Paine’s thoughts and give credit for his ideas to other people like Kant. Walker went on to describe Kant’s ideas versus Paine’s ideas and he showed how they were similar and different. Towards the end of the article Walker discussed Paine’s idea for a “civilan militia” rather than a “standing army”.
Wlaker, Thomas. “The Forgotten Prophet” Tom Paine’s Cosmopolitanism and International Relations”. International Studies Quarterly (Mar. 2000) Pp. 51-72.
This essay was a very interesting one. it was filled with many useful quotes that could be used in a research essay. Walker does a good job of giving detail to what he is explaining and he talks about useful topics about Paine.
October 12th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Audrey Griess
“The Actuarial Radical: Common Sense about Thomas Paine”
In his article, Christopher Hitchens explains that Thomas Paine shouldn’t be emulated. He inserts his point of view that he once believed that Paine should be admired, but then he provides his article as a counter argument. He explains that Paine didn’t stir a revolution with his words; Paine provided common logic during revolutionary times. In his article, Hitchens includes the many opinions others have held of Paine including the opinions of: Cecilia Kenyon, Moncure Conway, Burke, etc. He writes about the relationships between Paine and other political figures of his time; he stresses that Paine didn’t provide the fire of their revolutions. Hitchens probes into the relationship between Paine and Jefferson and includes the texts of some of their correspondences in order to reveal how Paine’s common sense logic only mimicked the writings of his time. The author also includes reasons why he feels Paine wasn’t a visionary, and he includes a list of others who have influenced his thought including the Puritans, Milton, and Locke. Throughout this article, Hitchens emphasizes the point that he sees Paine as a “borrower and synthesizer, not an originator.”
Hitchens, Christopher. “The Actuarial Radical: Common Sense about Thomas Paine.” Grand Street 7.1 (1987): 67-77. JSTOR. Web. 10 May 2009.
While openly giving his negative opinions of Paine, Hitchen also provides a wealth of information on Paine’s reputation as a radical. Assessable and interesting, Hitchen’s writing provides readers with a unique glimpse at Paine’s life and his works, and it provides a counter argument to writers who boast Paine’s attributes as a radical.
Audrey Griess
“The Lifelong Education of Thomas Paine (1737-1809): Some Reflections Upon His Acquaintance Among Books”
Caroline Robbins explains how Thomas Paine used many books and acquaintances to develop his intelligence and his writings. She demonstrates how he read multiple books by great writers from a range of genres to develop his mind. The article lists authors and books that she seems to think have influenced Paine. These authors include: James Thomson, Thomas Otway, Thomas Gray, William Whitehead, Charles Churchill, John Milton, Joel Barlow, William Blake, Miguel Cervantes, Daniel Defoe, Laurence Sterne, Philip Dormer, Jonathan Swift, Benjamin Franklin, Sir Isacc Newton, etc. In addition to these authors, Robbins suggests other “acquaintances” helped Paine develop his thoughts. She suggests that Paine became a disciple of the French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (and other philosophers of his time). Also, she comments on how the Bible and Quaker thought influenced Paine. Robbins ends her writing with information on The Rights of Man, and she explains how Paine lost friends and colleagues with the publication of this particular work. She concludes that this writing, as well as all of his writings, represents a culmination of the influences of the books and acquaintances that influenced Paine in his lifetime.
Robbins, Caroline. “The Lifelong Education of Thomas Paine (1737-1809): Some Reflections Upon His Acquaintance Among Books.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 127.3 (1983):135-42. JSTOR. Web. 10 May 2009.
Although she presents an interesting thesis, Robbins’ work reads like a list of speculations. In many instances, she suggests that it “seems” that Paine read a particular author. These speculations and the dull listing of her reasoning for these speculations make this a difficult piece to read.
October 13th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Christina Racanelli
Litt 2123
“The Forgotten Prophet: Tom Paine’s Cosmopolitanism and International Relations”
This article, “The Forgotten Prophet: Tom Paine’s Cosmopolitanism and International Relations” by Thomas C. Walker, is about how many historians and writers have forgotten about Thomas Paine and his writings. They continue to give credit to other men, such as Kant, who had opinions about the government and had made points on how to change things. Thomas Paine was one of the first men to write about the government and monarchies and how countries should be run with a democratic hand. He was one of the first men to say that the people should have a say in how their country is run; yet like I said, many historians and writers are giving credit elsewhere. Walker went on to describe Kant’s ideas versus Paine’s ideas and he showed how they were similar and different This article also goes on to explain Thomas Paine’s opinion on Democratic states. He believed that every country or state should not have kings or anarchies. He believed countries will have more peace if they are not run by kings; and that monarchies cause their own wars. Walker also talked about Paine’s ideas of free trade. He said that Paine believed that if countries traded goods that were needed, people would be less likely to go to war with these countries because they know they need their goods.. Towards the end of the article Walker discussed Paine’s ideas for a “civilian militia” rather than a “standing army”.
Wlaker, Thomas. “The Forgotten Prophet” Tom Paine’s Cosmopolitanism and International Relations”. International Studies Quarterly (Mar. 2000) Pp. 51-72.
This essay was a very interesting one. it was filled with many useful quotes that could be used in a research essay. Walker does a good job of giving detail to what he is explaining and he talks about useful topics about Paine.
International Studies Quarterly (italicized in word not on here?)
October 13th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Kelly Gallagher
“Inventing the American Public: Thomas Paine, the “Pennsylvania Magazine” and American Revolution”
This article provides information on the great influence Thomas Paine had on the American Public through his writings in the Pennsylvania magazine. This early magazine was created by Robert Aitken, a publisher and printer. The intent of this magazine was to be known as an “American magazine” for the American people. Between the years 1775 and 1776 Paine’s apprenticeship began with the magazine. This was Paine’s time to speak directly to the public, finding who his audience would be and reinvent them. His goals were clearly to get the American people to not be influenced by the British crown. He describes Great Britain and the colonies as has having an, “intolerable relationship.” Paine wanted to educate the American people and set them on the path to independence. Writing essays on the relationships between the colonies and Britain lead to a remarkable increase in sales for the magazine. Paine reached the public in a fashion never done before. Because of his writings the audience of the magazine grew rapidly. In conclusion, the article shows how Paine was able to breakdown his essays in a political and nonpolitical way. He was able to reach an audience that had never been the target of authors and printers before. He was the political voice of the unrepresented.
Larkin, Edward. “Inventing an American Public: Thomas Paine, the Pennsylvania Magazine, and American Revolutionary Political Disclosure.” Early American Literature. University of the North Carolina Press(1998):250-276. JSTOR. Web. 13 May 2009.
Edward Larkin provides his audience with the understanding of the voice Thomas Paine had, influencing and nurturing the idea of American liberty. Paine was able to create a voice for himself while publishing works through the Pennsylvania Magazine.
October 13th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
In “Parasiting America: The Radical Function of Heterogeneity in Thomas Paine’s Early Writing” Molly Anne Rothenburg explains how Paine’s writings showed his distain for the British control of America. He viewed the British as a parasite or a being that lives off the livelihood of another without reciprocation. Paine shows how America should become the parasite instead of being the host. The essay also shows how Paine made a connection between those people who enticed rival African tribes to fight so that they could capture innocent people and make them into slaves and the King of England. He states that the King also makes the colonies fight against each other which allows him to subjugate them and live off of their hard work. Using Paine’s criticism of British magazines, Rothenburg makes a connection to how Paine truly felt about Britain. He saw British magazines as “retailers of Tale and nonsense” and thought that America would be better off if it isolated itself from the disruptive British influence. Rothenburg also notes how Paine thought that America should become independent so that when the foreseen war between Britain and France occurs America will be able to trade with both though he states that America would not become a bridge between the countries.
Paine urges the American colonist to merge into a parasitical relationship but instead of it being homogeneous with citizens related to one another he proposes heterogeneity. He says that the colonial armies should employ a strategy of disruption, dissociation, and reconnection which would allow them to win against the British and become a new country.
Rothenburg, Molly Anne. “Parasititng America: the Radical Function of heterogeneity in Thomas Paine’s Early Writing.” Eighteenth Century Studies 25. 3 (1992): 331-51. JSTOR. Web.12 October 2009.
Though this essay contains a interesting bits of information, the writer uses confusing language and never defines the theories she is trying to explain. This essay would be useful to show how Paine used his writing to illustrate his hatred for England and all that was English
October 13th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Nathan Boyd
The article “The Paine Burnings of 1792-1793” is an essay on of the phenomenon that took place in Britain in the later portion of 1792 and into early 1793, which involved the burning in effigy of Thomas Paine. The article focuses on the motives behind, and the factors contributing to, these burnings or executions in effigy in a very large number of towns and cities across England. Frank O’Gorman, its author, writes that there has been little in the way of literature on this topic. His attempt at explanation tries to access, and to an extent debunk the view that the burnings were largely created and manipulated by the upper class loyalists. He submits that on the contrary they were a community activity, and while there were plenty of people opposed to the ritual, they were largely attended and enjoyed within all levels of the social structure. The author talks at some length about what records pertaining to the burnings are available through newspaper accounts and other sources, and what we can surmise about them factually with the that information. He explains the burnings historically as a movement of social upheaval, a pattern with which England, he argues, is well familiar. Another aspect that the article touches on is why the burnings became such a prominent ritual so suddenly, and then disappeared with equally as much speed. He argues that the reasons for this are based in the reasons for their occurrence at all: the reaction to the growing fear of invasion by French or Jacobian armies. He argues that Paine was well known in London in this time by reputation rather than by a fair analysis of his works, ideals, and character. He was more or less the scapegoat, known simply as “a republican, a revolutionary, and an atheist” by mere rumor and word of mouth.
O’Gorman, Frank. “The Paine Burnings of 1792-1793.” Past and Present. 193 (2006): 112-55.Project Muse. Web. 13 Oct. 2009.
The article is focused on a fairly specific and somewhat obscure aspect of history. The ideas that the author expresses are well supported, and while the historical synopsis is somewhat lengthy, the theories presented in order to explain and interpret the complexities of the burnings are quite clear, and thoughtful.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Brittney O’Brien
LITT 2123
October 13, 2009
In the article “The Moral Economics of Tom Paine,” written by William Christian, Thomas Paine wanted people to have economic independence while having moral integrity; however, in order for that to occur, the government would have to be renewed and act on economic factors. Man’s moral nature would develop only if a political revolution were to occur. According to Christian, the process of reform had three stages: first, political education; second, political action; third, social and economic improvement (367). Paine believed that the common people’s opinion was significant and needed in politics. The governing class exercised the monopoly of power and possessed knowledge and education, which Paine wanted to end. Paine had said “all men had equal rights,” instead of the belief and saying that all men are created equal. As Christian stated, “If it were only for economic reasons that men were brought into contact and into possible conflict, there was no reason why they should sacrifice moral rights” (370). But the government is involved, and they take the natural power of man and replace it with a fake and equal power. Paine felt that the government and its factors should not impose upon the moral integrity of present man. Education is the only item that distinguished one man from another. Christian quotes Paine saying “Men are naturally the same in all countries; it is education alone which marks the difference between them” (371). Paine was determined to have a revolution; however, he knew that people’s opinions alone would not cause a change in government. Paine’s program had two parts: first, “to teach the people the nature of society, expose the workings of government, and show them their rights”; once that was completed, the second stage, the revolution, would begin. The revolution was meant to confirm the moral equality of all men, and for this to be seen as the epitome by society, a new state was Paine’s goal. Paine wanted to establish a society that would help the common people have equality and gain political power; he believed that it was necessary for them to enjoy moral independence.
Christian, William. “The Moral Economics of Tom Paine.” Journal of the History of Ideas 34. 3 (1973): 367-80. JSTOR. Web. 10 October 2009.
William Christian clearly respects Paine. This article was easily read, and his thesis and point of view were fully understood.
October 13th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
In the article “Thomas Paine’s The Age of Reason Revisited” author Franklyn K. Prochaska takes us back to when The Age of Reason was written, when it was finally published, and the reaction that the public had towards it. The article in particular focuses on the religious aspect of The Age of Reason and all the adjuncts that go along with it, including deism and atheism. Prochaska mentions both the supporters of Paine’s work and ideas, as well as those who opposed it. Paine argued many different opinions on religion and how it should be used in modern-day society, as well as its pros and cons. The doctrine of Deism is mentioned several times and it is made clear that Paine had much interest in this religious practice. Aside from Paine himself, the article mentions the likes of some of his biographers including Moncure Conway, described by Prochaska as “the most thorough writer on Paine.” Among the attackers of Paine and his interest in Deism, Gilbert Wakefield (a Unitarian) took aim at the fact that Paine had criticized all the things that he and his religious group had taken out of their religion. Many other critics pointed out that if Paine were to criticize the laws of society—those set forth by the church—then Paine was questioning the rules and the laws of God. Joseph Priestly said that “Paine’s system failed to supply the sentiments, the morality, and the happiness that were its [Religion’s] objects.” Although The Age of Reason is considered a classic nowadays, back then it was seen as both an enlightening piece of work, and as a dangerous and thought provoking instrument that promoted free thought and nonconformity that the “English establishment” feared would envelop the country.
Prochaska, Franklyn K. “Thomas Paine’s The Age of Reason Revisited.” Journal of History and Ideas. 33. 4 University of Pennsylvania Press. (1972): pp.561-576. http://www.JSTOR.org/stable/2708857. Web. 13 October 2009.
This article focuses mainly on the religious aspect of Paine’s The Age of Reason. The author covers his admirers and his critics and seems to focus mainly on these aspects, rather than Paine himself, as the article goes on. The text seems to drag at some points, but overall it is an eye opening essay.
October 13th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Michelle Stanisce
“Thomas Paine and the Cassies” and “Thomas Paine, Privateersman”
The first essay “Thomas Paine and the Cassies” by A. Owen Aldridge is about Paine’s study of classical languages and view of ancient civilization. It critiques virtually everything in Paine’s work which represents the positive influence of the classics, from his words loaded with clichés such as the comparison of Washington with Fabius to expressing approval of Cicero’s definition of the Law of Nature. Aldridge also talked about, in comparison to the rather generalized and subdued language in his works concerning his merits of the classics, the terms in which he questions the value of studying them are solid and strong. Towards the end of this article, it discussed the eighteenth century is to be considered to be the century of classicism and of the Enlightenment which gave great emphasis on social and scientific advancement which reflects a belief in progress; classicism. The second essay “Thomas Paine, Privateersman” by Alyce Barry focuses on the journeys that Thomas was a part of, as a Privateersman. Soon after, Thomas thought he became an outspoken admirer of God’s creation. He enjoyed the imagery of the sea, fond of the bottomless depth, despite his father being angry that he volunteered.
The essay “Thomas Paine and the Cassies” presented some interesting, well detailed facts in which clearly point out why Thomas Paine is to be considered NOT a classicist.
“Thomas Paine, Privateersman” is filled with many facts that could be used in a research paper. It gives a lot of great detail about the journey Thomas was involved in. This is an easy piece to read.
Aldridge, A. Owen. “Thomas Paine and the Cassies.” Eighteenth-Century Studies. 1.4 (summer, 1969):370-80. JSTOR. Web. 13 May 2009.
Barry, Alyce. “Thomas Paine, Privateersman.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 101.4 (Oct 1977):451-61. JSTOR. Web. 13 May 2009.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Theresa A. Miro
“The Limits of Revolutionary Radicalism: Tom Paine and Slavery.”
This article by James V. Lynch is about Paine’s standing on abolitionism. When Congress accepted a sculpture of Paine by Gutzon Borglum, they gave praise to Paine’s works and contributions; along with acknowledging all he’s done, they tried to put to rest some misconceptions from his writings such as his standing on slavery. congress called Paine an “abolitionist and racial egalitarian” (177). This article ran through the ups and downs in his popularity and argued that he was not exactly against Negro rights. Some extractions from a couple of his articles: “African Slavery in America” and “Justice and Humanity” are given as proof of his abolitionism. Lynch makes the argument that even though Paine may not have put his full effort into the issue of abolitionism, he says that we cannot ignore the link between his ideas on liberty, society, and government playing a part in the end of slavery and the beginning of equality in America.
Lynch, James V. “The Limits of Revolutionary Radicalism: Tom Paine and Slavery.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 123.3 (1999): 177-99. Jstor. Web. 11 Oct. 2009.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Theresa A. Miro
“The Limits of Revolutionary Radicalism: Tom Paine and Slavery.”
This article was a highly informative and interesting read. James V. Lynch’s argument of Paine being an abolitionist is well supported with many references. He puts a great deal into putting to rest the cloudy areas of Paine’s reputation and making us really think about how his ideas have affected us today.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:37 pm
Lily Sakhan
“Thomas Paine’s Response to Lord North’s Speech on the British Peace Proposals”
Around the time of the American Revolution Paine and others writers were active in motivating the colonists. Some of the writers that were involved wrote under pseudonyms to protect their identities. Many of Thomas Paine’s works were not included in his catalog of writings because they were written under one of his pseudonyms. Paine’s travels around the time of the American Revolution were tracked by a series of accounts by those whom he visited and letters written by Paine, himself. Literature had a very large impact on the citizens of the colonies. During the American Revolution, many people were divided by the writings sent by British politicians as well as the various types of works written by the citizens of the colonies and those directly involved in military affairs. Paine’s writings style is analyzed and evaluated in order to identify his authorship in the written work printed during his lifetime. The tone, style and content of the pieces acknowledged by Paine and his letters are compared to other writings in order to identify Paine as the author. Paine’s writings were a source of encouragement and reinforcement for the colonists cause of making America independent of any British involvement.
Springman, Kevin T. “Thomas Paine’s Response to Lord North’s Speech on the British Peace Proposals.” Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 121.4 (1997): 351-370. Print.
This article provides an evaluation of Thomas Paine’s style of writing and explanations for identifying compositions that were assumed to be written by him. Also included, is Paine’s commentary on Lord North’s peace proposal.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:05 am
Abi Conway
Professor Kinsella
Litt 2123-01
10/14/09
Summary and Annotation: What to Make of What You Read
In his essay “Paine and Dickinson”, A. Owen Aldridge goes against conventional wisdom in claiming that two noted American revolutionaries, Thomas Paine and John Dickinson, are actually quite similar figures with regards to their propagandist ideologies and rhetorical styles. Aldridge highlights not only their support of the natural rights of man as a basis for framing their political stances but also the similar diction and phrasing of their written propaganda. Aldridge makes a point to mention smaller similarities as well, noting social contacts they shared and religious beliefs the two men had in common. Walter H. Eitner discusses a series of satirical “letters” written during the time of the American Revolution in his essay “Jeremy Belknap’s The Foresters: A Thrice-Told Tale.” Eitner argues that Belknap’s piece is not only underappreciated in contemporary criticism, but also often misrepresented. The second, scarcely known version of the letters, published in 1796, is, in Eitner’s opinion, the more superior and accurate collection of the letters. Eitner asserts that scholars discussing The Foresters would do well to work from this later version because it shows Jeremy Belknap’s dedication to improvement via additions and corrections when compared to the earlier printing.
Aldridge, A. Owen. “Paine and Dickinson.” Early American Literature. 11.2 (1976): 125-138. JSTOR. Web. 7 Oct. 2009.
Aldridge wants people to accept a view which considers Paine and Dickinson more alike than has previously been believed. His work is thoroughly researched and successfully comparative. I consider it a useful comparison and an effective argument.
Eitner, Walter H. “Jeremy Belknap’s The Foresters: A Thrice Told Tale.” Early American Literature. 14.2 (1979): 156-162. JSTOR. Web. 7 Oct. 2009.
Eitner’s main argument contends that Belknap’s The Foresters are being lost to history undeservingly; he considers the letters to be overlooked by scholars and makes are argument to change that. As for his position that the 1976 edition supersedes the 1972 edition, it seems this is only in terms of technical revision and not so much content. His essay is useful in terms of comparison, but I consider his argument for the superiority of the second edition to be partly opinion.
October 14th, 2009 at 1:29 am
Jacob Whritenour
Litt 2123
Thomas Jefferson was considered a traitor to his country before he became president. Charles Lerche wrote an essay entitled, “Jefferson and the Election of 1800: A Case Study in the Political Smear.” In it he details some of the dirty politics that still exist today. He explains why Jefferson would not make a good president because he is an atheist. That all Americans would not vote for an atheist in a Christian country. Lerche also explains what plans Jefferson would make by copying France’s political system. The evidence seems stacked against Jefferson and his political decisions. Lerche makes it seem like the entire country is against Jefferson; that he could never become a president. Jefferson was the victim of slander and accused of being dishonest and immoral. Those who did believe in his views voted for him out of sympathy. All of this is difficult to prove and can never be taken back. That is the moral lesson to slandering; that it is easy to start but can never be stopped.
Lerche,Charles. “Jefferson and the Election of 1800: A Case Study in the Political Smear.” The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 5, No. 4. Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture. 1948. pp. 467-491. JSTOR. Web. 14 Oct. 2009.
Lerche has many sources and his writing is quite detailed; posing many interesting points. This is a very useful essay if the case is about political slandering or Thomas Jefferson’s views on politics in comparison to France.
October 14th, 2009 at 1:30 am
Jessi Meisel
“Review: Thomas Paine: Context, Text, and Presentism” by Laurence Dickey was the first essay, and it talks reviews Tom Paine by John Keane, though Dickey mentions a few other works that should have been mentioned in Keane’s work. Dickey claims that Keane should have taken a more aggressive approach on his own argument about Common Sense. Although the book doesn’t just talk about Common Sense, the main focus of the review is how Keane briefly mentions a topic, then does not elaborate on concept. “Tom Paine and American Loneliness” by Martin Roth, being the second essay, is about the plot and themes of Thomas Paine’s early works. Mentioning examples to which the works resemble, Roth claims that most of Paine’s works talk about becoming “an American”, and how to obtain that status.
Dickey, Laurence. “Review: Thomas Paine: Context, Text, and Presentism.” Reviews in
American History 24.2 (1996): 216-25. JSTOR. Web. 14 October 2009.
This essay mainly argues about how John Keane should have elaborated on the politics of Thomas Paine. An essay of this caliber would be used for a research paper on Thomas Paine’s politics, but maybe not on just Thomas Paine himself. Also, this essay was quite interesting to the point where I’d like to read John Keane’s book to see where this author was coming from.
Roth, Martin. “Tom Paine and American Loneliness.” Early American Literature 22.2 (1987):
175-182. JSTOR. Web. 14 October 2009.
This essay brings about the ideal of what the “American” is and should be according to Thomas Paine. I feel like this essay was promoting other works to compare to Thomas Paine’s works, and did not talk so much about Thomas Paine and the works themselves.
October 14th, 2009 at 2:35 am
Rachel de Moose
“Thomas Paine and the Attitude of the Quakers to the American Revolution” and “Familial Politics: Thomas Paine and the Killing of the King, 1776”
The first essay, “Thomas Paine and the Attitude of the Quakers to the American Revolution,” by Robert P. Falk, presents an argument closely examining the relationship between Thomas Paine and the Quakers. Falk gives some background information about Quaker traditions as well, such as being pacifists and simplistic. He cites Voltaire several times in relation to Quakers. Voltaire had a positive attitude toward them, as did many of the French. (Until they got involved, that is.) Then the article advances to the American Revolution and the Quakers’ roles, such as passive resistance and a statement Paine made to them about how they needed to step up to the plate. The end simply sums up the previous statements. The second article, titled “Familial Politics: Thomas Paine and the Killing of the King, 1776,” is by Winthrop D. Jordan. Jordan starts off talking about Common Sense and its impact upon the people of the Colonies. He continues to delve into Paine’s controversy he brought about among the citizens, and how it led to the revolt. Toward the middle of the essay, Jordan speaks of Paine’s technique, such as saying two things at the same time. It progresses to Paine’s slandering of the King, who he referred to as the “Royal Brute of Great Britain” (298). A point is made later on, that Paine was not the only one to speak out on the issue. Not much else is discussed except other authors’ representations of King George III as a tyrant.
Falk, Robert P. “Thomas Paine and the Attitude of the Quakers to the American Revolution.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 63.3 (1939): 302-10. JSTOR. Web. 12 October 2009.
Jordan, Winthrop D. “Familial Politics: Thomas Paine and the Killing of the King, 1776.” The Journal of American History 60.2 (1973): 294-308. JSTOR. Web. 12 October 2009.
Falk’s essay was clear and had many citations to back himself up, but focused a little too much on the history of Quakers; it is common knowledge that they are pacifists. His points about the French being favorable to Quakers was interesting.
Jordan’s article was historically thorough, perhaps too much so. He used many citations, but did not support them with the argument enough.
October 14th, 2009 at 6:13 am
Kathryn Somerset:
“German-American Liberalism and Thomas Paine” by Mark O. Kistler
This article attempts to articulate the connections drawn between German-Americans and Thomas Paine. The first group inspired by Thomas Paine is the Fourty-Eighters: this was a group of well-kept and educated men who were protesting for freedom in one’s culture and political beliefs. Interestingly enough, Paine’s work The Age of Reason was widely received by this group of revolutionaries. It reflected their beliefs: that all of Colonial America should experience freedom of religion. After a short overview of how Paine’s pieces influenced these radicals, the article commits to convey the messages of another group: the German free-thinkers. They were very similar to the Forty-Eighters: they too wanted growth within the common man. Freethinkers’ believes were not influenced through religion, as most members were declared agnostics and atheists. They therefore looked to man to ask questions and develop scientific reason to answer these. At this point, the article begins talking of particular Freethinkers who were responsible for the connection that was drawn to Paine: Hecker and Struve often wrote and spoke of Paine’s writing.
The article also speaks of Moncure Conway, pastor of the first Universalistic Church, and shows his love for the German Freekthinkers. It is said that Conway had a particular interest in the group’s humanist and rational beliefs. Conway is so swayed at one point by these people’s passion, that he writes a sermon denouncing his past beliefs and expressing his respect for Thomas Paine. He spoke of Paine as a “religious prophet:” in that Paine clearly demonstrated a love for change and growth and often saw what most people were blinded to at the time (Kistler). Through this recognition of Paine and his enlightening beliefs, respect for him as a whole developed: he was eventually seen as the influential figure he was. The respect and love for ideas was not one sided: Paine also grew to see the importance of some German radicals’ pieces, and announced his interest in them quite often. The remains of the article discuss the tradition of Paine’s anniversary celebrations. It is seen through this article how in the adoption of Paine’s ideologies, German-American’s fought for a greater nineteenth-century America.
Kistler, Mark O. “German-American Liberalism and Thomas Paine.” JSTOR. ITHAKA, 1962.
Web. 13 Oct. 2009. .
Kistler’s article was clear and concise. It was well put together and the information was quite interesting: the Moncure Conway piece was quite fascinating. His citations were pure and free of error.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:56 am
From Brigid S.
____________________
Brigid S
Tom Paine’s Voucher Scheme for Public Education
Tom Paine and the Idea for Progress
In Tom Paine and the Idea for Progress V.E. Gibbens contradicts writer Lois Whitney’s claim that Paine was a primitivist, demonstrating through Paine’s own words that he was a champion for progress on every level of civilization. Gibbens concedes that while Paine thought that man should look back to his original state of being to examine his nature, he needs to refine his present and make provisions for the future. Gibbens cites from Paine’s Agrarian Justice, Crisis, Rights of Man, and Common Sense to emphasize Paine’s progressive views such as equitable tax laws, the abolishment of slavery, deism, and a universal league of nations. In Tom Paine’s Voucher for Public Education E.G. West describes how England’s 18th century tax system cast a heavy burden on poverty-stricken families, leaving their children undereducated. Paine made proposals for revamping the system for which even the classical economists agreed. Paine saw that the tax burden fell mainly on the poor and how the taxes were disproportionately spent on paying the national debt. He proposed “a remission of taxes to the poor” and a redistribution of the tax money for their education. Taking this idea a step further he advised that the money be put in the hands of the families instead of the government. West cites Paine’s claim in Rights of Man that “A Nation under a well-regulated Government should permit none to remain uninstructed.”
Gibbens, V.E. “Tom Paine and the Idea of Progress.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 66.2 (1942): 191-204. JSTOR. Print. 12 Oct. 2009.
West, E.G. “Tom Paine’s Voucher Scheme for Public Education.” Southern Economic Journal 33.3 (1967): 378-82. JSTOR. Print. 12 Oct. 2009.
Gibben’s essay emphasizes Paine’s design for global enlightenment, his promotion of science, and his fervent belief is deism. Passionate and perceptive, Gibbens provides accessible material for those researching Paine’s ideals and intentions.
West’s article is relevant to 21st century educational concerns and could be cited in arguments made for present day school voucher programs. Thoroughly researched and cited, this essay would be useful for scholars of Paine as well as economists.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:57 am
From Gabe
___________________________
Gabe R
Introduction to Literary Research
That Guy Who Wrote Those Great Pamphlets- What Was His Name, Again?
John M. Bumsted and Charles E. Clark’s “New England’s Tom Paine: John Allen and the Spirit of Liberty” discusses the life of the historical figure John Allen. In 1764, Allen became a pastor. Before then, he was a preacher who had experiences with writing. A few years later, Allen was fired and ended up as a schoolmaster in London. Shortly afterwards, he was put on trial for forgery. Although he was proved innocent, his reputation became tarnished. After his case, Allen wrote a piece asking King George III to “preserve the constitution and liberties of the people” by giving John Wilkes his position back or disbanding the house doing harm. Following this work, Allen began writing “A Political Tale”, which discussed corruption in the British ministry, supported Baptists, and criticized other religious figures. A couple of years later, Allen appears in Boston attempting to become a pastor again. A deceased pastor’s wish was for Allen to give a sermon at his church, but his forgery case had given him a bad name, costing him the opportunity. However, while staying in Boston, Allen had become a known writer and released “Oration”, which became very popular. Because he was a Baptist, Allen particularly stood out among revolutionaries. He professed loyalty to King George III, but only if he behaved properly. Allen was upset because the English had their rights tampered with, stating that if the King abused his power by controlling Americans, his right to rule would be lost. Following his declaration, Allen encourages Americans to stand up for themselves. He also states that Britain and America should separate and stand equally, claiming that both nations will benefit. Allen also does not believe that King George III has the right to punish Americans for breaking British laws while residing in America. His last known piece discusses his desire to end slavery. All future works are difficult to prove as Allen’s because his name becomes common. Bumsted and Clark conclude their article with the interesting note that Allen is not as well-known as the success of his works might indicate.
Bumsted, John M. and Charles E. Clark. “New England’s Tom Paine: John Allen and the Spirit of Liberty.” The Williams and Mary Quarterly, Third Series 21. 4 (1964): 561-70. JSTOR. Web. 13 October 2009.
Overall, this was a good source that I would recommend for using in a research paper about John Allen. It may be old, but Bumsted and Clark are respectable authors and do a good job explaining Allen’s life. It takes a couple of attempts at reading, but this article becomes fairly easy to understand and gives decently thorough details about Allen’s career.
October 14th, 2009 at 9:15 am
Paula Levick
“Clerical Perspectives on Deism: Paine’s The Age of Reason in Virginia”
by: James H. Smylie
In this article, “Clerical Perspectives on Deism: Paine’s Age of Reason in Virginia”, James H. Smylie focuses on the reaction of the clergy in Virginia to Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason. Smylie goes into great detail to describe the reasons the Protestant church was opposed to Paine’s Deist views, as expressed in his Age of Reason. Paine’s intent behind the writing of Age of Reason is discussed, implying that he wrote it to, “promote Deism against the atheism which he believed was fostered by Christianity.” Three reasons are given as to why Paine does not agree with Christianity. The first being that he did not understand a Christian’s reliance on the written word of God instead of direct revelation from God to man. Second, he felt as though the Bible was a book made up of mythological stories and people and did not feel that this was solid ground on which Christians could base their beliefs. And lastly, he could not accept a book (the Bible) which he felt was full of “wickedness.” The clergy in Virginia were concerned with Paine’s writing for three reasons. First, they feared the influence Paine would have in turning Christians against their religion because he was a powerful public figure. Second, Paine’s attack was directly against Christianity. And lastly, Paine’s writings did not show reverence for the doctrines of Christ which were believed by the dissenters who were aligned with Deists against, “spiritual tyranny and oppression.” The last couple pages of the article are devoted to the attack that the Virginia clergy waged on Paine to counteract his views in Age of Reason. The clergy argued with Paine’s beliefs by stating that his church was built on “shifting sand.” They were opposed to Paine’s beliefs because of his view on creation, his excessive use of reason to support his beliefs and the fact that reason has limitations. Although the clergy did attempt to devalue Paine’s beliefs, their counter attack was not forceful and their argument far from rock solid. The reasons for this was because they were basing their beliefs solely on the Bible and because they relied on rationality and mystery to claim their case for their faith.
Smylie, James H. “ Clerical Perspectives on Deism: Paine’s The Age of Reason in Virginia.” Eighteenth-Century Studies 6.2 (1973): 203-20. Jstor. Web. 13 Oct 2009.
This article would be very relevant to research regarding the effect of Paine’s Age of Reason on the Protestant church. I found that this article was very easy to follow and made many solid points to support its claims. It also had numerous footnotes which a researcher could use to find further readings on this topic.
October 14th, 2009 at 9:16 am
From Tania
______________
Tania
Gary Kates’ “From Liberalism to Radicalism: Tom Paine’s Rights of Man” explains why “Paine’s Rights of Man is a work at odds with itself” (571). He tries to prove his point by giving a history of the events leading up to the writing of Rights of Man: the murders of Foulon and Bertier; Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution of France; and James Mackintosh’s Vindiciae Gallicae. The pamphlet Rights of Man was written during the course of the French Revolution and it was published in two parts. Part one was published in early 1971 and part two was published in 1792. The debate that Kates makes is that “biographers have taken Paine’s remarks at face value and assume that the two parts deliver essentially the same message” (571) when, in fact, the two works have little to do with each other. He states that part one was a direct respond to Burke’s work and a defense of Marquis de Lafayette. Lafayette is a significant figure in both the French Revolution and the American Revolution, just like Paine. Paine returned to France soon after Rights of Man part one was published and found that the atmosphere and views in France had dramatically changed. This is the time when Paine’s views became radical. Scholars and biographers assume that part two is a sequel to part one. This assumption or confusion can be accredited to the translator of the work. Rights of Man part two was translated by Francois Lanthenas. Lanthenas omitted Paine’s preface to Burke and dedication to Lafayette. Kates establishes that “Rights of Man part two was never intended as an attack upon Burke, but rather a serious challenge to the leadership of Lafayette and Sieyès” (583). The points made by Paine in part two are the opposite from the ones made in part one: “Rights of Man reveals an ideologue’s desperate search to maintain some shred of intellectual consistency during a period of intense revolutionary change” (587).
Kates, Gary. “From Liberalism to Radicalism: Tom Paine’s Rights of Man.” Journal of the History of Ideas. 50.4. 1989: 569-87. JSTOR. Web. 7 Oct., 2009.
The article is full of useful information. It is a good article to read, and it has a lot of strong evidence. It gives information on people, places, events, politics, and ideology of the late 1700s and how it all led up to the writing of Rights of Man.
October 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Bridget Egatz
Prof. Kinsella
Annotation Assignment
10/13/09
Understanding Paine and the Evils of the Printing Trade
Michael Everton’s article, “The Would-Be-Author and the Real Bookseller”, explains the trials and tribulations that colonial authors’ faced when dealing with printers of that time. Everton also explains in detail three main points that he wished to extensively elaborate on, within this main subject. The first topic discussed in this article was particularly focused on the colonial times in the printing industry and the principles of the business. Everton continues to discuss how printers, at this time, had a tendency to ignore common ethics and an author’s request to discontinue publication by printing the books anyway for profit, which is then not shared with those authors. The second issue that Everton discusses is the debate that arose from Paine’s point of view on who is in control of printing and what right’s printers have with what they print. According to some printers, especially the one who printed Common Sense, at the time it was legal and considered common practice if an author presented the trade specialist with a copy of their work intended for production, reneged on the idea, and then the printer publishes it anyway. The last issue discussed was the author’s rights to popularized published slander on tradesmen who didn’t follow normal business ethics. Paine was very familiar with the written word and knew how to use it to his advantage. Finally Everton wished to convey all the ways in which Paine went in order to make his point regarding this issue. In summary, Michael Everton fully explains the hardship authors’ endured and the tradesmen who benefited in the colonial years. He expresses Paine’s undying struggle with his most popular and powerful piece of work and the retaliation that led to an eventual change.
Everton, Michael. “The Would-Be-Author and the Real Bookseller.” American Literature. University of North Carolina Press; Vol. 40, (2005): 79-110. JSTOR. Web. 11 October 2009.
This article would be useful to anyone writing an essay, in need of reference material, about the ethics of trade in colonial America with an insight of Paine’s struggle with his work and its publication.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Melissa Ihle
This article by Ian Dyck discusses Paine’s influence in countries such as the United States, Britain, and France. Paine’s internationalism is argued as a result of his contribution and involvement with scientific and political debates, and Newton. His mentor Oliver Goldsmith, Samuel Johnson, and Benjamin Franklin are mentioned as well as Paine’s purpose in writing Common Sense as well as his other American writings. American citizenship, patriotism in the face of internationalism, and the American Revolution are also areas of interest, where Dyck explains Paine’s views on sophistication and “global civilization” (123). Dyck highlights British radicals and the French Revolution, including Richard Price, William Cobbett and Edmund Burke, through Paine’s perspective and criticisms. Much emphasis is placed on Paine’s reaction to Burke’s Reflections. There is much comparison of Paine and these aforementioned men. Ultimately, this piece discussed Paine’s perspective on international norms, global citizenship, and its evolution due to historical events.
Dyck, Ian. “Local Attachments, National Identities and World Citizenship in the Thought
of Thomas Paine.” History Workshop 35 (1993):117-35. Oxford UP. JSTOR.
I found this piece very insightful and intriguing; it presented Paine on a global scale, with which I have been growing more and more interested. Scholarly language yet very readable, I would certainly recommend it.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Brianne Theocharides
Alfred Owen Aldridge’s article “Thomas Paine in Latin-America” aims to explain how Thomas Paine’s influence was spread throughout South America in the early 1800’s, specifically Chile, through the work of editor and journalist Camilo Henriquez. Although many historians to date have focused primarily upon the work of Manuel Garcia de Sena, whose translations of Paine’s texts have become most popular, Aldridge argues that de Sena’s work emerged in Chile only after the ideas of Henriquez had begun to circulate. The work of Henriquez differs greatly from that of de Sena’s in that he was not merely a reporter or translator but he aimed at the hearts of his readers, employing literary tactics in the same fashion that Paine was famous for. Aldridge also points out that unlike de Sena, Henriquez only translates direct quotes from Paine’s work on a few occasions. His publications are more centered around the concepts of Paine than his exact words. Paine’s ideas, channeled through the literary efforts of Henriquez, have thus left a lasting impression on the people of Spanish America.
Aldridge, Alfred Owen. “Thomas Paine in Latin-America.” Early American Literature 3. 3 (1968/1969): 139-147. JSTOR. Web. 13 Oct 2009.
Aldridge assumes his readers will just accept most of what he has to say as fact even when little or no evidence is there to back him up. I was disappointed with the amount of broad assertions, generalizations, masked contradictions, and failed logic throughout. His language discredits his argument because it doesn’t convince me that he even knows what he’s talking about at times.
October 14th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
From Rob H.
________________
“Thomas Paine: Ransom, Civil Peace, and the Natural Right to Welfare” by John W. Seaman, analyzes Thomas Paine’s political philosophy on subjects such as welfare and civil peace. Furthermore, Seaman presents how these beliefs coincided with Paine’s doctrine of “natural rights” and provides criticism of these convictions. After his introduction in section I, Seaman mainly deals with The Rights of Man and Agrarian Justice, the two main works that propagated Paine’s theme of welfare. In section II, Seaman dissects Paine’s views on reforming European government. Paine believed that these governments were corrupt because citizens held fewer rights under these societies then they would have had naturally. Moreover, Paine believed that civil peace could be obtained through a number of reforms; namely, compensations for the poor and the alleviation of a number of taxes that targeted the poor but not the rich aristocracy. This paralleled his belief that governments should impose conditions on citizens equally. In the third section, Seaman discusses Paine’s philosophy on land ownership and in the fourth section, deals with Paine’s “ransom” doctrine, a very important concept in his text. In his doctrine, Paine believed that citizens who owned a considerable amount of land could only do so with the consent of the people. This consent was given in the form of compensations; money. However, Seaman finds a number of flaws in this concept and criticizes them accordingly.
Seaman, John W. “Thomas Paine: Ransom, Civil Peace, and the Natural Right to
Welfare.” Political Theory 16.1 (1988): 120-142. JSTOR. Web. 13 October 2009.
A well written and interesting article that presents a number of criticisms of Thomas Paine’s political philosophies. Not only are Paine’s views interesting, but Seaman does an excellent job at dissecting them intelligently.
October 14th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Tom Paine: Victim of the Rights of Man
R. R. Palmer seems to be obsessed with the fact that Paine was an “ingenious worth young man,” Palmer quotes Benjamin Franklin more then once in his essay. To some up the essay, Paine is America’s Jean-Jacques Rousseau; a western philosopher who lived from 1712-1778. It seems Palmer expects his audience to know who Rousseau was, by last name only. Palmer makes a case, almost repeatedly that Paine was like Rousseau. Though on the next page states that Paine lacked most of Rousseau qualities.
The whole essay seems to be a statement of Paine being a victim, too smart for the rest of us. Sure he played chess and dominos, but Palmer has to point out never cards. Palmer also points out Paine’s distrust in the imagination. That Paine’s writing was supreme literature, not mere fancy stuff that hid the truth. But Paine was all about equal measure, the only true revolutionist in America, France, and England, or so Palmer says.
Tom Paine Victim of the Rights of Man. R. R. Palmer. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 66, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), pp. 161-175. Published by: Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Web. 13 Oct, 2009.
This article seemed very slanted. A good read, but deifies Paine. It seems quite evident that Palmer thinks Thomas Paine can do no wrong.