This book is long and detailed, a bit of a slog at the beginning, but I stuck with it, and felt rewarded for it. In some ways the book is old-fashioned history in its broad narrative sweep and its resuscitation of the hero-approach, as the subtitle implies. Along with role played by Jefferson and Lincoln, but not quite on their level because of his own personal flaws and the irreconcilable contradictions in his political movement, is the treatment devoted to Jackson. But the real hero of the book is democracy itself, in Wilentz's recounting something never fully achieved and constantly under threat from elitist impulses, or simply from the desire to distort the system for the benefit of a few.
The broad disparity of ratings in the reviews posted so far is a fair reflection of the fact that this book is not for everyone. If you are looking for a first orientation on US political history in the first half of the nineteenth century, you would be better served by a shorter treatment. In my case, I was basically up to speed on the broad outlines of the period, but was hazy on the details of the various sectional crises, and never understood the fuss Jackson made over a national bank. I was fascinated by the author's attention to state and local political developments. They were not only affected by national trends but also shaped them in turn.
My three-star rating is not a reflection on the quality of the book; those with an interest in the subject will find it excellent. ( )

Princeton professor Sean Wilentz here presents the in-depth story of the turn in American politics toward democracy. I suppose it is relatively well-known that the Founding Fathers (especially, say, John Adams) considered the phrase "democratic government" simply another way of saying "mob rule." Rules governing enfranchisement were written into the early state's charters…rules specifically designed to exclude persons of color and the poor from having a voice in government.
However, from its inception—no matter how much the Founding Fathers feared its outcome—a deeply democratic impulse was a key engine of American political development. However, this impulse took different forms: in fact, it might be more accurate to speak of American democracies, ultimately rooted in the differing socioeconomic spheres of the city and the country.
Wilentz demonstrates how this fundamental struggle to define American democracy shaped every major early American political debate the rise (and fall) of the federal banking systems, labor, and—most importantly—slavery. In particular, Wilentz I think does a fine job of demonstrating how the American Civil War was rooted in both concerns about state's rights and about slavery. He is also adamant that, though the break was an outworking of the "city" and "country" democracies birthed in the nation's founding, the institutionalization of slavery and white racial superiority was fundamental to the founding of the Confederate States of America; in the twisted logic of the time, the establishment of white superiority was seen as necessary to preserving true democratic rule.
On one level, this book is spectacularly well-done. The writing is clear, the research is meticulous (nearly 200 pages of endnotes are provided!), and his characterizations of the key figures are lively and even entertaining. However, at another level, the amount of detail can be almost excruciating for non-specialist readers like me. To be honest, I reached a point where I continued to read the book simply because I had read so much already that I felt that I must see it through. I'm glad that I did, but I knew that I was not probably getting as much benefit from Wilentz's work as I could or would have if I would have had a better background in the history of the period.
At the end of the day, I must give the book high marks, recognizing that any fault I found with it more relates to my poor preparation as a reader than to any flaw with the book itself. I would definitely say this is a book for connoisseurs not dilettantes. Wilentz shows that American politics has, from our birth, been infinitely complex, shaped by the forces of stalwart principle and expedient compromise.
Perhaps the most important part of the book for me was found in the final chapter, where Wilentz demonstrates how Abraham Lincoln saw himself as the inheritor of Thomas Jefferson's mantle. Many postmoderns have noted the oddity (and seeming hypocrisy) that the man who penned the Declaration of Independence with its self-evident truth that "all men are created equal" still owned slaves. However, Wilentz's story shows both how Jefferson was not hypocritical in his own time and yet laid the foundation for the rise of American democracy that eventually demanded the end of slavery. I'm left to ponder the reality that, like the writers of Scripture, it is possible that Jefferson wrote "better than he knew," his words giving shape to a reality even he couldn't see at the time. It causes me to ponder the nature of the continuing work of the Spirit as a reality of human life, and wonder where might the Spirit be at work today in our midst, speaking to us in the most unlikely of voices in the most unlikely of ways. ( )

“The Rise of American Democracy,” by Princeton historian Sean Wilentz, is nothing short of a magisterial synthesis of political history in the United States from 1800 to 1860. In 800 pages, followed by extensive annotated endnotes, Wilentz explores how the bases of political power and political involvement expanded through the momentous antebellum period – and how they laid the foundation for both Southern secession and Northern resistance at the outbreak of the Civil War.

It is a story filled with conflict and a myriad of overlapping movements striving to obtain for themselves what the Revolutionary generation had called “the blessings of liberty.” It details the slow, but steady, expansion of suffrage in all of the states in the early 19th century. Then it considers how these voters were wooed by, or formed, political groups to pursue various goals, especially economic ones. In each election, various coalitions of these groups banded together as larger political parties, but Wilentz makes clear that these groups were never completely united or even entirely cohesive, which has significant implications on any understanding of American history during the period.

Breathtaking in scope, in research, in judgment, and in the ability to incorporate into the overall narrative hundreds of influential figures, Wilentz's book is, simply, a masterwork, the culmination of an impressive career. Not only readable, but consistently engaging, it reminds all that what is called historical progress is not inevitable or easy, but has been achieved in American history in the consistent and persistent agitation and activity of politically engaged groups of people. ( )

4953. The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln, by Sean Wilentz (read 7 Sep 2012) (Bancroft Prize in 2006) This massive study of democracy's advance in the US from 1800 to 1861 is brimming with careful and original research. There are 796 pages of text, 156 pages of notes, and a detailed 96 page index. I liked that the study of each election for President and each Administration was carefully explicated in lucid prose. It is hard to see how the subject could be better explained. I thought sometimes explanations were more detailed than necessary, but I found the book masterful and very convincing in showing the pretty steady advance of democratic ideas, even though when it ends in 1861 there are still huge advances to be made in American democracy. .After reading this book no one with an open mind can doubt that the Confederacy came into being because the South wanted to keep slavery and the myth of the South wanting 'freedom' is thoroughly shown to be untenable. ( )

A very long narrative of the development of democracy in America. Covers a lot of rather obscure events, and I felt that I was seeing lots of trees, but the forest was hard to make out. Still, it does give a good sense of how democracy developed, from the end of the Federalist era to the Civil War.

Wilentz does seem somewhat enamored of Jefferson, Jackson, and the Democrats, and not at all pleased with the Federalists and the Whigs. So while he does mention some of the horrible ways that Jeffersonians and Jacksonians treated Blacks and Indians, he is rather forgiving of their human rights abuses. At the same time, he is very harsh in his treatment of the undemocratic tendencies of the Federalists and Whigs. ( )